Abstract
A questionnaire designed to measure value orientations was administered to a sample of institutionalized delinquents, non-institutionalized delinquents, and non-delinquent adolescents for the purpose of testing some aspects of the Yinger-Cavan approach to delinquent behavior. Several conceptual distinctions were made between contracultures and subcultures to further clarify the Yinger-Cavan discussion. Only partial support was found for the continuum approach to deviancy. Members of contracultures (delinquents) did not reject middle-class values as was hypothesized. O ne of the most persistent difficulties in the study of deviant behavior has been the paucity of empirical facts on which to base theoretical speculations. This becomes quite serious when it is realized that a theory which is not closely tied to empirical research is not likely to be very useful in the long run. Recent theories of delinquency which have assumed cultural as opposed to psychological causation postulate several different explanations for antisocial behavior.1 Most have been 1 (A) Lozwer-Class Theory: This theory explains delinquent behavior as due largely to the pursuit of goals which are peculiar to the lower classes. Adolescents in the lower class have idiosyncratic and bizarre orientations to life which force them into delinquent patterns of behavior. Soloman Korbrin, The Conflict of Values in Delinquency Areas, Amnerican Sociological Review, 16 (October 1951), pp. 653-661; Walter Miller, Lower Class Culture as a Generating Milieu for Gang Delinquency, Journal of Social Isstes, 14 (1958), pp. 5-19, Implications of Urban Lower-Class Culture for Social WAork, Social Service Review, 38 (September 1959), pp. 219-236, and The Impact of Community Group Work Programs on Corner Groups, Social Serzvice Review, 31 (December 1957), pp. 390-406; John C. Ball, Delinquent and Non-Delinquent Attiudes Toward the Prevalence of Stealing, Journal of Criminal Law, Cri nology and Police Science, 48 (September-October 1954), pp. 259-274; John P. Clark and Eugene P. Wenninger, Goal Orientations and Illegal Behavior Among Juveniles, Social Forces, 42 (1963), pp. 49-59; and F. Ivan Nye, James F. Short, Jr., and Virgil J. Olson, Socio-Economic and Behavior, Ainericac Journal of Sociology, 63 (January 1958), pp. 381-390. (B) Means-Goals Theory: This theory explains delinquency as due largely to the unreal distribution of chances for the attainment of cultural-wide goals. Because adolescents (especially in the lower and lower-middle classes) have internalized cultural goals of success without having legitimate means for their attainment, they resort to illegal means and antisocial behavior. Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and S ocial Structure (Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1963), pp. 131-161; Albert K. Cohen, Delintquent Boys (Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1955) ; John I. Kitsuse and David Dietrick, Delinquent Boys: A Critique, American Sociological Review. 24 (April 1959), pp. 208-215; Albert J. Reiss, Jr., Status Deprivation and Behavior, Sociological Quarterly, 4 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.101 on Sun, 09 Oct 2016 06:28:56 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
