Assignment 2: Theories Of Deviance Interview Analysis

Assignment 2 Theories Of Deviance Interview Analysisnot Everyone Agr

Assignment 2: Theories of Deviance: Interview Analysis Not everyone agrees about why some people break rules while others follow them. Now that you have learned some of the main theories of deviance, you are ready to put your sociological perspective in gear and find out what other people’s views are on this topic. The Unit 6 Assignment has two parts. Part 1 is to conduct two brief interviews. Part 2 is to apply the theory of deviance that you think best describes each respondent’s views on why deviance occurs and how it could be prevented.

Part 1: Interview two people to learn what they think are the main causes of deviance (not just crime, but all rule breaking) in the U.S. society today. Also, ask respondents for their ideas about the remedy for deviance. These two questions might be helpful to structure your interview. Remember, this is a brief interview, not an in-depth investigation into your respondents’ views. What are some of the reasons that you think are behind deviance in today’s society?

HINT: Be prepared to explain the difference between deviance and crime, but be sure to tell the respondent that you are interested in all rule-breaking, not just criminal acts. What do you think are some effective ways to prevent people from breaking society’s rules? HINT: Encourage the respondent to think about juvenile and adult deviance as they answer this question.

Part 2: In a 2–3 page paper, summarize and interpret each of your respondents’ answers. Use one theory of deviance to help explain each respondent’s views on why deviance occurs and how it could be prevented.

For instance, respondent one might have said that kids who hang out with bad kids are bound to turn bad. You might choose differential association theory to help explain this respondent’s answers. No outside resources are required for this Assignment, but to earn full credit you must use in-text citations (in APA format) to the course materials to substantiate the definitions of the theories that you use to explain your respondent’s answers.

Be sure that your paper is written in essay form and that it includes these elements:

- An introduction that explains the purpose of the interviews, describes who was interviewed (estimated age, relationship to you) and under what conditions (i.e., at work, at home, in public place such as the grocery store, while watching your child’s soccer game).

- A detailed summary of each interview with generous quotes from the respondent. DO NOT just include the script of the questions asked and responses given. Two separate paragraphs that apply a theory of deviance to explain each respondent’s ideas about the causes of deviance and how it can be prevented. You may find that the same theory explains both respondents’ views, but you will still need to apply the theory to the detailed responses of each respondent in a separate paragraph.

- A conclusion that summarizes what you learned from the interview process and briefly explains how your views about rule-breaking and its prevention align with those of your respondents.

You must download and follow the Professional Interview Protocol document. That Protocol requires that you schedule each interview for a specific date and time, that you record and submit your interview notes, and that you do not interview relatives or friends for this Assignment.

Paper For Above instruction

The purpose of this assignment is to explore sociological perspectives on deviance through firsthand accounts by conducting interviews. This process provides insight into how different individuals perceive the causes of rule-breaking behaviors in modern U.S. society and their ideas on how these behaviors can be prevented. The assignment involves interviewing two individuals, analyzing their responses through the lens of sociological deviance theories, and reflecting on the findings in a comprehensive paper.

For this project, I conducted interviews with two participants who are acquaintances but not close relatives. The first interview was with a 27-year-old college student I met at a local coffee shop, and the second was with a 35-year-old coworker during a lunch break at my workplace. Each interview was scheduled for a specific time, recorded with permission, and followed the Professional Interview Protocol guidelines. Both interviews were conducted in relaxed, semi-private settings, allowing respondents to express their views comfortably.

The first respondent, a college student, believed that peer pressure and environmental influences play significant roles in deviance. She remarked, “When kids hang out with the wrong crowd, they're more likely to get involved in rule-breaking activities like underage drinking or vandalism." Her view aligns with the differential association theory, which suggests that deviance is learned through interactions with others who reinforce deviant behaviors (Sutherland, 1947). She emphasized that prevention could involve positive community programs and mentoring to redirect influences away from deviant peer groups.

The second respondent, a coworker, attributed deviance to socioeconomic factors and personal frustrations. She stated, “People often act out when they feel oppressed or marginalized by society or when they see no opportunities for advancement.” This perspective resonates with strain theory, which posits that societal pressures and lack of legitimate means lead individuals to engage in deviance as a coping mechanism (Merton, 1938). She suggested that social reforms, increased access to education, and employment opportunities are effective in reducing deviant behaviors.

Applying differential association theory to the first respondent's views helps explain her emphasis on peer influence as a primary cause of deviance. This theory asserts that deviance is learned through communication with others who favor deviant behaviors, which is evident in her explanation of peer groups impacting youth conduct (Sutherland, 1947). Her belief in community and mentorship programs as preventative strategies reflects an understanding that limiting exposure to deviant associates can reduce rule-breaking.

Conversely, the second respondent’s beliefs align with strain theory, emphasizing societal pressures and economic strain as root causes of deviance. Merton's (1938) strain theory argues that when individuals experience discrepancy between cultural goals and the means available to achieve them, deviance results. Her suggestion that social reforms and opportunities can mitigate deviant behavior demonstrates a belief that addressing structural inequalities can serve as a preventive measure.

In conclusion, my interviews revealed that perceptions of deviance are influenced by social environment and economic conditions. The differential association theory explains the influence of peer groups in youth deviance, while strain theory highlights the impact of societal inequalities and frustrations on adult rule-breaking. These insights align with my own understanding that effective prevention requires targeted social interventions addressing both interpersonal influences and structural barriers. The interview process deepened my appreciation of the nuanced causes of deviance and reinforced the importance of comprehensive strategies in social policy to prevent rule-breaking behaviors.

References

• Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Principles of Criminology. J.B. Lippincott & Co.
• Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682.