With all the elements of Merton’s theory, thoughts towards American society show an impression that the social environment creates strong burdens for deviant behavior, especially towards the lower class and those least likely to obtain the ‘American Dream’ (Williams, 1997). Merton’s strain theory, developed from the foundational ideas of Emile Durkheim, suggests that society sets culturally approved goals and means to achieve them, but not everyone has equal access to these means. This disparity creates strain, leading individuals to adapt in various ways, some of which may involve deviance.
Cultural Expectations and Social Regulation
The inconsistency between cultural expectations and regulations does not only destabilize social solidarity for institutional norms but can also encourage abuses of these norms. Disadvantaged individuals, obstructed in their success, will adapt in a deviant manner to their frustrating environment. Merton’s theory articulates that society promotes certain success goals (like wealth) but doesn’t provide equal means for everyone to achieve these goals, leading to a sense of strain and frustration.
Adaptations to Strain
The way that individuals adapt to the frustrating environment is seen in the table of adaptation brought about by Merton. The table consists of five different adaptations: “conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion” (Merton, 1938, p. 676). These adaptations represent the roles individuals implement in reaction to cultural and structural strains. The outcome depends upon an individual’s personality and cultural background (Merton, 1938, p. 678).
Conformity
Conformity is where society is most stable, and people adhere to both cultural objectives and traditional means. It is the most common of the adaptations. According to Merton, “were this not so, the stability and continuity of the society could not be maintained” (Merton, 1938, p. 677). Therefore, if individuals in society do not follow regulations and expectations, there would be no stability. Conformists accept the goals and the means set by society and strive to achieve them legitimately.
Innovation
Innovation usually involves the acceptance of cultural objectives but the rejection of legitimate means to achieve these goals. Instead, individuals achieve these goals through alternative methods such as theft or fraud. Innovators are often those who accept societal goals but lack the means to achieve them through conventional channels, prompting them to devise new methods, albeit illegitimate ones.
Ritualism
Ritualism involves the rejection of cultural goals but adherence to institutional norms. Therefore, ritualists continue to follow the system but give up on success. An example would be a worker in a dead-end job who has minimal interest in their work and no ambitious career goals. They comply with societal norms and rules but do not strive for the culturally defined success.
Retreatism
Retreatism is the rejection of both cultural goals and conventional means of achieving them. Individuals who fall into this adaptation might become drug addicts, tramps, or drunks. Merton states, “These have relinquished, in certain spheres of activity, the culturally defined goals, involving complete aim-institutional norms” (Merton, 1938, p. 677). Retreatists withdraw from the societal competition for success and live outside the conventional social structure.
Rebellion
Rebellion is the rejection of both conventional and cultural goals, but with an aim to replace both foundations with new goals and means. Political revolutionaries are examples of rebels who seek to create a new social order by challenging and overthrowing the existing one. They propose alternative goals and means that align with their vision of a better society.
Limitations of Merton’s Strain Theory
The limitations of Merton’s theory of strain can be argued, as his study primarily concentrates on working-class crime and does not account for middle-class and white-collar crimes. Additionally, the theory predicts that all individuals under strain will become criminals, which is not the case. For example, women often experience significant strain due to unequal pay, yet statistics show that women commit less crime than men (Newburn, 2012).
Furthermore, the strain theory could be considered outdated due to its origin in the 1930s, a time when societal roles, particularly those of women, were very different. Women were more family-oriented, often staying at home to rear children, whereas today, many women are career-minded. The strain theory fails to acknowledge the experiences of women adequately, as the statistics used to test the theory focus primarily on young male offenders.
Another critique is that the strain theory does not address the structure of society comprehensively, merely claiming that it is unequal. Not everyone in society is money-oriented as a way of achieving objectives, unlike in Merton’s time in the USA.
Historical Context and Evolution
Merton’s theory emerged after the 1930s depression in America, reflecting the societal belief that financial prosperity was achievable through hard work. However, the reality for many was severe poverty due to limited opportunities. Thus, Merton’s theory is contextually bound to its time and may not explain crime in multiple societies and different historical periods (Carrabine, 2009).
Legacy of Strain Theory
The legacy of strain theory is significant as it was one of the first theories to highlight the social aspect of crime. Whereas classicism emphasized that everyone has “free will” to choose to commit a crime, and positivism considered criminals as having low intelligence and different body types, strain theory suggests that crime is a product of societal pressures and cultural norms.
The strain theory posits that criminals are not born but made by societal influences. This perspective shifts some responsibility for crime from the individual to societal structures, suggesting that society needs to address its own behaviors and cultures to reduce crime rates.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the strain theory developed originally from Emile Durkheim and critiqued by Robert Merton explains that criminality does not occur due to a person’s physical attributes but arises when societal goals are imposed without providing equal means to achieve them. Individuals under strain may resort to illegitimate methods to achieve culturally defined success. This theory remains relevant in analyzing crime within certain contexts today, though it requires adaptation to address modern societal changes and diverse experiences across different demographics.