Were Cloward and Ohlin Strain Theorists? Delinquency and Opportunity Revisited

Abstract

Although Cloward and Ohlin are frequently seen as offering a variation of Merton's strain theory, I argue that their work is more accurately conceived as offering a fundamental critique of this paradigm—a critique rooted most firmly in the writings of the Chicago School. Cloward and Ohlin's central premise is that strain (or stress) theories are incomplete because they do not account for the content of the resulting adaptation. As a result, a second perspective—which they called “opportunity theory”—is needed to explain why persons choose one wayward path rather than another. I attempt to detail Cloward and Ohlin's reasoning, suggest reasons why the main point of their theorizing has often been missed, and discuss the significance of their perspective for formulating more adequate explanations of crime and deviance.

Is American Society More Anomic? A Test of Merton's Theory with Cross‐National Data

“…Merton (1997:ix) himself advocated that ''finding ways of putting a theory to new and exacting empirical tests provides an authentic contribution, both theoretical and methodological.'' There is no doubt that solving the ''main puzzle'' of anomie (Cullen 1988) remains a long process where experts disagree on the meaning of the word. The current study represents an important move toward a better measure of Merton's concept of anomie.…”

The Effects of Corporation- and Industry-Level Strain and Opportunity on Corporate Crime

“…Previously, Cloward (1959) identified two key mechanisms of opportunity structures-that is, learning and situations conducive to carrying out criminal roles. Yet, tests of strain theory have not fully explored whether strain is differentially associated with offending across opportunity structures, specifically across the two key mechanisms of opportunity structures (Cullen 1984(Cullen , 1988Cullen and Wright 1997;Hoffmann and Ireland 2004).…”

On the Origins of the Violent Neighborhood: A Study of the Nature and Predictors of Crime‐Type Differentiation across Chicago Neighborhoods

“…For this reason, there is systematic variation in crime rates across places and populations, with neighborhood disadvantage being a key indicator of where high crime rates tend to cluster. Scholars often rely on this part of their proposition to label Cloward and Ohlin strain theorists, but the unique contribution of their argument is in their clear statement that "the pressures that lead to deviant patterns do not necessarily determine the particular pattern that results" (Cloward & Ohlin, 1960, p. 40;Cullen, 1988). They argue that, just as legitimate means are not equally distributed, nor are illegitimate means; opportunities to learn and engage in various types of crime are differentially distributed across neighborhoods.…”

“…In order to provide a broader commentary on differential opportunity as a whole, future research could examine whether Cloward and Ohlin's predictions specifically hold for criminal and retreatist subcultures as well. This would likely be a productive direction, since much literature on differential opportunity has largely lumped it in with strain theories and tended to ignore the proposition that the response to strain is socially structured (Cullen, 1988). By revisiting the unique propositions it offers with regard to both the volume and type of crime across neighborhoods, criminology may well find there is something to Cullen's (1988, p. 233) sentiment that "Cloward and Ohlin's insights … are much ado about something.…”