Reflection on “A Revised Strain Theory of Delinquency"

My 1985 article presented a revised strain theory, which stated that delinquency results from the blockage of pain-avoidance behavior as well as the blockage of goal-seeking behavior. The article had some success, laying the groundwork for my “general strain theory,” now one of the leading explanations of crime and delinquency (Agnew 1992, 2007). This reflection describes how the article revised strain theory, how I built on the article, and the research inspired by the article.

Most strain theories state that delinquency results when individuals are unable to achieve their goals through legitimate channels. These theories focus on the goal of monetary success or the somewhat broader goal of middle-class status (Merton 1938; Cloward and Ohlin 1960; Cohen 1955). Lower class individuals are said to have special trouble achieving these goals because they are less well prepared for school, attend inferior schools and lack the means for advanced educations. The frustration that results from this goal blockage increases the likelihood of crime; individuals may try to obtain money through acts such as theft and drug selling, may strike out at others in their anger or may focus on alternative goals that are conducive to crime (e.g., masculinity goals emphasizing toughness). Strain theories were the leading theories of crime in the 50s and 60s and they had a major effect on public policy, being an inspiration for the War on Poverty. But by the 1980s strain theories had come under serious attack, they had little effect on crime research, and several prominent criminologists were arguing that they should be abandoned (Agnew 1985).

Strain theories were attacked for several reasons (Agnew 1985). Among other things, they were unable to explain why crime rates peak during adolescence; if anything, the strain caused by the inability to achieve monetary and status goals should be more consequential for adults. Also, research using self-report measures of crime revealed that the relationship between social class and delinquency is weaker than previously thought, with some studies finding little or no relationship (Agnew 1985). The most prominent attack, however, was based on the assertion that strain theories predict that crime should be highest among those who do not expect to achieve their educational and occupational aspirations. Research instead found that crime is highest among those with both low educational and occupational expectations and aspirations, a finding interpreted in terms of control theory (such individuals do not expect or desire much, and so have little to lose by engaging in crime). Several strain theorists responded by arguing that individuals pursue a range of goals beyond monetary and status goals, with many of these goals being more immediate in nature, such as good relations with parents and spouses. But the research here was not very supportive (Agnew 1985).

My 1985 article revised strain theory by arguing that crime is caused not so much by the inability to achieve positively valued goals, but by the inability to escape from painful or aversive conditions. This argument was said to be especially relevant to the explanation of delinquency because juveniles are “compelled to live with their family in a certain neighborhood; to go to a certain school; and, within limits, to interact with the same group of peers and neighbors” (Agnew 1985:156). There is little that juveniles can do to legally escape if they are mistreated by others in these settings. Juveniles who experience aversive treatment, however, may engage in delinquency to escape from or reduce such treatment (e.g., running away from home, truancy, fighting to end peer harassment). They may also become angry and strike out at the source of their aversive treatment or related targets. I briefly noted, however, that several factors influence whether juveniles respond to the blockage of pain-avoidance behavior with delinquency, including their beliefs regarding delinquency, their level of association with delinquent peers, the likelihood of sanction and the perceived injustice of the aversive treatment.

Certain of these arguments were tested with data from a national sample of adolescent boys, and the results indicated that delinquency is more likely among those subject to harsh, demeaning and unfair treatment by...