Need By 10 April 2016 At 11:00 PM Not Everyone Agrees About

Need By 10 April 2016 By 2300hrsnot Everyone Agrees About Why Some Peo

Need By 10 April 2016 By 2300hrsnot Everyone Agrees About Why Some PeoNeed By 10 April 2016 By 2300hrsnot Everyone Agrees About Why Some Peo

Need by 10 April 2016 by 2300 hours: Conduct two brief interviews to explore respondents’ views on the main causes of deviance (including all rule-breaking, not just crime) in contemporary U.S. society, and their ideas for preventing deviance. Summarize and interpret each interview using a relevant sociological theory of deviance, supported by course materials with in-text citations in APA format. Your paper should include an introduction explaining the purpose, the interviewees (estimated age, relationship, context), detailed summaries with quotes, application of a specific deviance theory to each respondent’s answers, and a conclusion reflecting on what you learned and how your views align with theirs. Follow the Professional Interview Protocol regarding scheduling, recording, and avoiding relatives or friends as interviewees.

Paper For Above instruction

The purpose of this assignment is to gain a sociological understanding of deviance through primary data collection by conducting interviews. By engaging with two individuals, I aim to explore their perspectives on the causes of rule-breaking in contemporary society and their suggestions for prevention. This process not only illuminates individual viewpoints but also facilitates the application of sociological theories to explain differing beliefs about deviance.

For this project, I interviewed two acquaintances: a college-aged peer, approximately 21 years old, and a neighbor in their late 40s. The first interview took place in a casual environment at a local coffee shop during the weekend, while the second occurred at the respondent’s home during a weekday evening. Both interviews were conducted informally, allowing for open-ended responses and in-depth discussion while maintaining focus on the central questions. I ensured that no familial or close friendship ties influenced the responses, adhering to the protocol necessary for unbiased data collection.

Interview Summaries

The first respondent, a college student studying sociology, expressed the belief that peer influence and societal pressures significantly contribute to deviance. They stated, "When young people hang around with the wrong crowd, it’s easy to see how they might get involved in rule-breaking behaviors." This statement reflects an understanding of social influence on deviance, emphasizing the impact of peer groups. They also pointed out that media portrayal of crime and rule-breaking glamorizes deviance, making it more attractive to youth. Regarding prevention, they suggested mentoring programs and positive community activities that provide alternative social networks for youth to prevent them from falling into deviant behaviors.

The second respondent, a middle-aged community volunteer, attributed deviance largely to economic hardship and lack of opportunities. They remarked, "People turn to rule-breaking when they feel they have no other way to make a living or improve their circumstances." This perspective aligns with structural explanations of deviance, which focus on social inequalities and economic disparity as root causes. For prevention, they advocated for improved social services, job training programs, and more equitable economic policies to address the systemic issues that foster deviance.

Application of Sociological Theories

The first respondent’s view aligns closely with the differential association theory, proposed by Edwin Sutherland, which posits that deviance is learned through interactions with others who endorse deviant behavior (Sutherland, 1939). Their emphasis on peer influence as a key factor supports this theory by illustrating how exposure to deviant norms within social groups can lead individuals to adopt similar behaviors. The respondent’s suggestion of mentoring and positive social programs further complements this theory, illustrating ways to alter social interactions and reduce the likelihood of learning deviant behaviors (Schulenberg & Maggs, 2017).

Conversely, the second respondent’s explanation of deviance rooted in economic hardship resonates with strain theory, articulated by Robert Merton. Strain theory argues that societal structures may pressure individuals into deviance when they are unable to achieve culturally approved goals through legitimate means (Merton, 1938). The respondent’s focus on systemic inequalities and lack of opportunities as causes of rule-breaking exemplifies this perspective. By advocating for broader social reforms, they highlight preventative measures aimed at alleviating structural strain, consistent with the principles of strain theory (Agnew, 1992).

Conclusion

The interview process broadened my understanding of how diverse perspectives interpret the causes of deviance. The first respondent’s emphasis on peer influence and social learning aligns with theories emphasizing interpersonal interactions, while the second’s focus on structural socio-economic factors reflects macro-level explanations. My own view appreciates a multifaceted approach, recognizing both social environment and systemic inequalities as significant. These insights reinforce the importance of holistic prevention strategies that address both individual behaviors and structural conditions to reduce deviance effectively.

References

• Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47–87.
• Macionis, J. J. (2013). Sociology (15th ed.). Pearson Learning Solutions.
• Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682.
• Schulenberg, S. E., & Maggs, J. L. (2017). Social Learning Theory. In G. R. Adams & M. J. Hummer (Eds.), Handbook of Crime & Deviance (pp. 25–46). Springer.
• Sutherland, E. H. (1939). Principles of Criminology. J. B. Lippincott Company.