Edwin Sutherland is considered one of the most prominent criminologists of the twentieth century and one of the true founders of the social school in criminology. His ideas represented a fundamental turning point in explaining criminal behavior, as he shifted attention from biological and individual psychological factors to social and interactional factors. Below is a comprehensive presentation of his most important ideas according to a clear scientific structure.
Crime has long occupied a central place in human thought., giving rise to numerous theoretical attempts to explain its causes and dynamics. For a considerable period, criminological explanations were dominated by biological and psychological interpretations that focused on individual traits, pathologies, or hereditary factors. However, such approaches proved insufficient to fully capture the complexity of criminal behavior and its variation across societies and social groups.
Within this intellectual context, the contributions of Edwin Sutherland marked a decisive shift in criminological thought. By emphasizing the social nature of crime and the role of interaction, learning, and group influence, Sutherland challenged deterministic explanations and introduced a sociological framework capable of explaining both conventional crime and elite forms of criminality.
The central problem addressed by this article can be formulated as follows: How can criminal behavior be explained as a socially learned phenomenon, and to what extent does social interaction shape individual involvement in crime regardless of social class? This problem raises further questions regarding the adequacy of biological explanations, the role of social environments, and the mechanisms through which criminal values are transmitted.
To discuss this topic, the following structure will be adopted:
First: The Theory of Differential Association.
Second: Crime as a Learned Social Behavior.
Third: Rejection of Biological and Psychological Reductionist Explanations.
Fourth: The Concept of White-Collar Crime.
Fifth: Crime as an Organized Social Phenomenon.
First: The Theory of Differential Association
The theory of differential association constitutes the cornerstone of Sutherland’s thought and the theory upon which he built his explanation of criminal behavior. This theory is based on a central idea that crime is not an innate or inherited behavior, but rather an acquired social behavior learned through interaction with others.
Sutherland argues that an individual becomes criminal when definitions favorable to the violation of law exceed definitions unfavorable to it. By definitions, he means the attitudes, values, and rationalizations that legitimize criminal behavior or make it acceptable in the individual’s perception. This learning process takes place within small, intimate social groups such as the family, friends, or work groups.
Sutherland also emphasizes that differential association varies in terms of frequency, duration, priority, and intensity, which are elements that determine the degree of influence a group has on shaping criminal behavior. Accordingly, crime is not the result of an isolated individual decision, but rather the product of an integrated social context.
Second: Crime as a Learned Social Behavior
Building on the theory of differential association, Sutherland affirms that crime is learned in the same way that individuals learn any other form of social behavior. The individual learns not only the techniques and methods of committing crime, but also the motives, attitudes, and justifications that support such behavior.
Sutherland stresses that criminal learning is not limited to direct instruction or imitation, but also includes symbolic interaction, the exchange of ideas, and the acquisition of meanings that justify the violation of legal rules. In this way, crime becomes the outcome of a continuous social learning process.
This perspective dismantles the idea of the “born criminal” and confirms that any individual, under certain social conditions, can learn criminal behavior if a supportive environment is available.
Third: Rejection of Biological and Psychological Reductionist Explanations
Sutherland adopted a sharply critical position toward traditional schools, especially the biological school represented by Cesare Lombroso, which linked crime to physical or hereditary traits. He also criticized psychological explanations that attribute crime to individual disorders isolated from the social context.
Sutherland believed that these explanations suffer from scientific shortcomings because they ignore the influence of the social environment and fail to explain differences in crime rates among groups and societies. Moreover, they lead to the stigmatization of certain categories without addressing the real causes of criminal behavior.
Instead, he called for a comprehensive social explanation that links crime to social structure, patterns of interaction, and the values prevailing within groups.
Fourth: The Concept of White-Collar Crime
The introduction of the concept of white-collar crime is considered one of Sutherland’s most revolutionary contributions to criminology. Through this concept, he challenged the prevailing belief that crime is a phenomenon confined to the poor or marginalized classes.
Sutherland defined white-collar crime as offenses committed by individuals of high social status and respectability during the course of their occupational activities. These crimes include, but are not limited to, corporate fraud, embezzlement, bribery, insider trading, and large-scale financial manipulation.
A key insight of Sutherland’s analysis is that white-collar crimes often cause greater harm to society than conventional street crimes. Their economic impact, social consequences, and erosion of public trust can be extensive, yet they frequently receive less attention from the criminal justice system.
Sutherland also demonstrated that white-collar crimes are learned behaviors, transmitted within professional and organizational settings where unethical practices may be normalized or even encouraged. This observation further reinforces his broader theory that crime, regardless of social class, is a learned social phenomenon.
Fifth: Crime as an Organized Social Phenomenon
Sutherland viewed crime as an organized social phenomenon rather than merely random individual acts. Society, through its value system and institutional organization, may create conditions that encourage criminal behavior or implicitly tolerate it.
He argued that societies may inadvertently create conditions conducive to criminal behavior through unequal distribution of resources, conflicting value systems, and inconsistent enforcement of laws. In some contexts, illegal practices may be tolerated or implicitly sanctioned within certain groups, particularly when they serve economic or political interests.
Furthermore, Sutherland highlighted the role of criminal subcultures, where alternative norms and values develop in opposition to official legal standards. Within these subcultures, criminal behavior becomes socially meaningful and collectively reinforced, contributing to its persistence and reproduction.
By framing crime as an organized social phenomenon, Sutherland provided a powerful analytical lens for understanding the structural roots of criminal behavior and the limitations of purely punitive responses.
Conclusion
The ideas of Edwin H. Sutherland represent a qualitative shift in criminology, as they established a social and interactional understanding of criminal behavior and linked crime to processes of learning and social association. His theory contributed to redirecting criminal policies toward social prevention rather than focusing exclusively on punishment, which makes his thought strongly present in contemporary criminological studies.
References
🔗 Crime as an Individual Phenomenon vs. Criminality as a Collective Issue – Discusses the differences between individual criminal acts and broader criminality shaped by society.
https://www.crimpsy.com/crime-as-an-individual-phenomenon-vs-criminality/
🔗 Criminality as a Collective Issue – Explores crime as a social phenomenon shaped by structural inequality and institutional factors.
https://www.crimpsy.com/criminality-as-a-collective-issue/
🔗 The Role of Criminology in Understanding and Analyzing Criminal Behavior – Looks at how criminology helps identify causes, patterns, and policy implications related to crime.
https://www.crimpsy.com/the-role-of-criminology-in-understanding-and-analyzing-criminal-behavior/
Society and Crime in Criminology (Office of Justice Programs)
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/society-and-crime-criminology
🔗 Crime and Delinquency (Journal overview)
https://journals.sagepub.com/home/cad
🔗 Critical Criminology (Journal)
https://link.springer.com/journal/10612/volumes-and-issues
🔗 Open Access Research in Criminology, Criminal Justice & Law (SpringerOpen)
https://www.springeropen.com/p/criminal-justice
🔗 Crime and Society: Understanding Causes and Consequences
https://scholarlyinsightreview.com/index.php/Journal/article/view/2
🔗 Past and Present of Crime Research in Social Forces
https://academic.oup.com/sf/article/101/4/1609/7123587
🔗 Forging Social Justice (The British Journal of Criminology virtual issue)
https://academic.oup.com/bjc/pages/forging_social_justice
🔗 Criminal Psychology and Criminology – Outlines the complementary roles of psychology and criminology in studying criminal behavior.
https://www.crimpsy.com/criminal-psychology-and-criminology-45/
🔗 Forensic Science and Criminology – Explores how forensic science contributes to understanding and investigating crime.
https://www.crimpsy.com/forensic-science-and-criminology/
🔗 Criminology and Criminal Policy – Discusses the interplay between criminological research and criminal justice policy.
https://www.crimpsy.com/criminology-and-criminal-policy/