Crime Deviance Model Answers

AQA A Level
sociology
Topic TEN MARKERS

Crime & Deviance
www.tutor2u.net/sociology
Page 2 AQA A Level Sociology topic TEN MARKERS: crime & Deviance
ITEM A

People are set goals by society, but not everyone has an equal chance of achieving those goals by
legitimate means. Barriers to achievement might include where people live, as well as educational
attainment. There are a variety of ways in which subcultures can respond to this.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which deviant subcultures
respond to blocked opportunities. (10 marks)

Subcultures are groups within mainstream society that have
their own, different, norms and values. Functionalists suggest There is no requirement for an
these subcultures are often formed when opportunities are introduction for 10‐mark
blocked. Inversion of mainstream norms and values or total questions. However, it’s a good
retreat from society are two of the ways in which subcultures opportunity to make your “2
may respond to a lack of opportunity. ways” fully clear.

Albert Cohen developed his theory of status frustration. He
notes that young working class boys are often low achievers One of the “hooks” in the item
at school; this means that opportunities to succeed on (educational achievement) has
mainstream terms are blocked. The boys respond by forming been picked up here and linked
a subculture which inverts the norms and values of to Cohen. Cohen’s theory is
mainstream society. What is considered good or praiseworthy briefly outlined. This is picking
by the majority is seen as negative and deserving of censure up AO1 marks (knowledge)
in the subculture, and vice versa. Because they are unable to and AO2 (application of
attain high status by conforming to societal values, members material from the Item).
of the subculture carry out anti‐social acts and commit crimes,
thereby garnering high status within their group. What Cohen
notes is not dissimilar to the anti‐school subcultures
recognised by Paul Willis in his “Learning to Labour” study. Some analysis begins with the
However, Cohen has been criticised for concentrating on comparison with Paul Willis
working‐class boys without seriously engaging with social (and it’s good to be synoptic).
class or gender. Some sociologists have questioned whether
members of delinquent subcultures consciously invert the Here is some evaluation. The
norms and values of mainstream society rather than mark scheme asks for
committing criminal acts out of boredom and a desire for “appropriate
excitement. analysis/evaluation”.

Cloward and Ohlin, on the other hand, considered how the
area in which someone lives might affect the sort of deviant Another “hook” is taken up
subculture they join and how that subculture responds to here with the idea that locality
blocked opportunities. A lack of socio‐economic opportunity might link to blocked
through education does not automatically mean that an opportunities.
individual will either embark on a criminal career or succeed
as a criminal. The locality in which people live can block Cloward and Ohlin explained
opportunities for success through crime, too, depending on succinctly with a focus on one
whether organised criminal networks already exist in the specific response (retreatism).
neighbourhood. Where no such network exists, a criminal
www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

AQA A Level Sociology topic TEN MARKERS: crime & Deviance Page 3
subculture might become retreatist (drop out of society) and
the response might therefore be to engage in drug‐taking or
similar activity. Cloward and Ohlin identified this response
alongside others, such as organised crime and fighting for
territory. In reality, however, many deviant subcultures
involve two or more of these characteristics. Gangs making
large sums of money from drug dealing also use the drugs;
and they fight with other gangs to take over territory and so
increase their drug trade. Thus, some would argue that
Cloward and Ohlin fail to explain how deviant subcultures Again there is clear evaluation
respond to how living in different localities might either block that is ultimately linked back
or increase opportunities. very explicitly to the question.

[421 words]

Examiner comments: Mark Band: 8‐10

This answer is comfortably in the top band. Two “hooks” are taken from the item and developed
in a way that clearly answers the question. Sufficient knowledge of subcultural theories is
included to gain plenty of AO1 marks, while there is also plenty of analysis and evaluation for
AO3.

There are other ways this question could have been approached, although “where people live”
and “educational attainment” are the obvious hooks and therefore do lend themselves to these
theories. Some students might see “blocked opportunities” and focus on Merton’s strain theory,
perhaps picking up on two “adaptations” to strain, however, without a very clear development to
“deviant subcultures”, this approach would struggle to attain high marks.

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

ITEM A

Some Marxists argue that crimes committed by the rich tend to be ignored, or they are able to afford to
get away with them through paying for the best lawyers or bribing officials. Other Marxists point out
that most laws are designed to control the working class or benefit the ruling class anyway, even those
that appear to benefit workers.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which society’s response
to crime and deviance benefits the ruling class. (10 marks)
Traditional Marxist ideas about crime emphasise how the real An introduction is not
purpose of the law is to protect the interests of the essential for 10‐mark answers
bourgeoisie and to control the proletariat in order to prevent but can help. Here it explains
revolution. The ruling class, and the institutions that serve an overall Marxist approach to
them, respond to crime only to benefit themselves. One way in the issues raised in the
which they do this is by turning a blind eye to white‐collar question and clearly identifies
and corporate crime. Another is by treating proletarian the two “ways” that will be
crimes more seriously, giving harsher punishments. pursued. These do emerge
from the Item, but the “hooks”
Chambliss found, in his study of Seattle, that the serious are less clear in this item than
criminals were often businessmen and politicians who used some.
their connections and wealth to avoid punishment, while the
police concentrated on the street crime and anti‐social Demonstrates some clear
behaviour perpetrated by the working class. Chambliss knowledge and understanding
argued this was because the laws and the police were not of Marxist views on class and
there to prevent crime, only to control the working class and crime and gains some AO3
protect the rich. This is supported by the work of Graham, analysis marks by finding
who found that the USA’s “war on drugs” did not extend to parallels between different
those drugs that made a profit for bourgeois pharmaceutical studies.
companies. However, this research is from the 1970s and in
recent years there have been high‐profile criminal
investigations into corporate crime (such as the Enron
scandal). Rather than the authorities choosing only to pursue
working‐class offenders, it may be that it is simply easier for
white‐collar criminals to escape detection because of the Some clear evaluation of the
nature of their crimes (often hiding in plain sight, with diffuse first “way” for AO3. Also keeps
victims). using examples and key terms.

However, Marxists note how, when they are pursued, white‐ The second way is introduced
collar and corporate criminals usually receive lesser partly in analysis of the first
punishments compared with working‐class criminals, even way (which is quite an
though their offences might involve much larger sums of effective way of maintaining a
money. Fraudsters sometimes avoid imprisonment or are in good chain of reasoning).
open prisons, whereas a burglar will be locked up. Sometimes
corporate crime is not dealt with through the criminal justice
system at all; for instance in high‐profile tax evasion cases Again the “way” is evaluated
where companies are able to reach arrangements with the quite strongly and ultimately

government. Although contemporary legal cases, such as linked to the question.
those of Starbucks and Google, support this argument, there is Of course more could have
also evidence to the contrary, where wealthy defendants get been included here (such as
harsher sentences and so ‘made an example of’.’ A the argument that people who
millionaire’s daughter received a long prison sentence for commit personal and violent
driving looters around London in August 2011, and the judge crimes are more in need of
used her advantaged background as an aggravating factor custodial sentences than
when deciding her sentence. This would suggest that society white‐collar criminals) but
does not always respond to crime in a way that benefits the selectivity is also a useful skill
ruling class. for 10 markers.

[404 words]

Examiner Comments: Mark Band: 8‐10

This is a top‐band answer to quite a difficult question. Sometimes there will be two very clear
hooks in the item, and on other occasions it might take a little more digging, like this one. There
were clearly other ways that could have been developed from the item, but these two answered
the question appropriately.

Essentially, this response is a brief introduction and two strong PEEEL paragraphs (point,
explain, evidence, evaluate, link).

This answer is concept‐rich with key terms employed throughout and it manages to be
contemporary, both by using the age of some of the relevant theories as an evaluative point, and
by using contemporary examples.


ITEM A

Some sociologists say that right realist approaches achieve control but not justice. Right realists
recommend severe punishments for anti‐social behaviour and low‐level crime in order to demonstrate
to the rest of society that these behaviours are not acceptable. They argue that this also prevents more
serious crime. Whether the police interpret behaviour as anti‐social might, however, depend on where it
is happening and who is doing it, not just on what is being done.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why right realist
approaches to crime and deviance might 'achieve control but not justice.'
(10 marks)
James Q. Wilson’s right realist “broken windows” theory A brief introduction that
inspired zero tolerance policing in New York that appeared to clearly puts the question into
have an astonishing impact on the city’s crime levels. context and identifies the two
However, two criticisms, suggesting that it achieved control reasons to be analysed. These
but not justice, are: some people were unfairly sent to prison very clearly emerge from
for minor crimes; the approach was inconsistently applied, hooks in the item (i.e. the
depending on particular social characteristics. references to severe
punishments and police
The idea of broken windows was that a community tolerating interpretation).
minor misdemeanours (such as vandals breaking windows)
falls foul of serious crime. To prevent the latter, there should This is a classic PEEEL
be zero tolerance of anti‐social behaviour and minor crime. paragraph. There is a chain of
One example of this was the “three strikes and you’re out” reasoning in the paragraph
approach: a serious custodial sentence would be given to allowing for some counter‐
people who had offended three times, regardless of what that evaluation at times and there
third offence was. This meant that people could be serving is a very clear link back to the
long custodial sentences for crimes as minor as jay‐walking, question at the end.
public drunkenness or washing people’s cars at junctions.
This led to a reduction in such behaviour, but could certainly
be viewed as being unjust, not to mention inefficient. At the
same time the broken windows approach reduced anti‐social
behaviour and minor crime, there was a dramatic decrease in
serious crime, too, with the homicide rate falling by over 50%.
Critics maintain that other factors, beyond zero tolerance
policing, accounted for the fall, for instance, a reduction in
poverty in the city. However, the correlation of the police
tactic and the fall in crime is impressive. Nevertheless, people
serving significant sentences for minor crimes is an example
of control without justice.

Another way in which the control achieved through right
realist approaches might be considered unjust is how it
impacts on some social groups more than on others. After all, The same approach is taken
freshman students engaging in public drunkenness or with this paragraph: a classic
jaywalking are very unlikely to find themselves accused of a PEEEL, plenty of detail and a

crime at all, let alone face a prison sentence. The targets for discussion that follows a chain
zero‐tolerance policing tend to be minority‐ethnic or low‐ of reasoning. Again, there is a
income people. clear link to the question.

Stereotypes about crime, labelling and police discretion
combine to ensure that while there is zero tolerance of anti‐
social behaviour by poor black people, there is significantly
more tolerance of middle‐class white people engaging in the
same behaviour. However, while right realists are likely to
argue that zero tolerance should mean zero tolerance of
students and middle‐class youth too, the discriminatory way
in which “zero tolerance” policies have been enforced is
another example of control without justice.

[398 words]


This is a very clear response, comfortably in the top mark band. It identifies the two reasons
quickly, and they are very clearly drawn from the item. The two reasons are then analysed very
clearly in two classic PEEEL paragraphs.

While an introduction has been used here, this is not essential. However, it has allowed the writer
to give some background and clearly identify the two reasons. Even with this, there is still quite a
lot of further explanation of the right realist approaches in the first paragraph so if all of this had
gone in the paragraphs with no introduction, it might have impacted on the clarity and
readability of the response.

Key terms are used regularly throughout and clear understanding is demonstrated of the
relevant concepts.


ITEM A

Black and Asian people are much more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than are their
white peers. Sociologists disagree about whether or not this is evidence of racism by the police. Some
sociologists suggest that the times when and places where stop and searches occur means that it is
unfair to expect stop‐and‐search data to be proportional to the whole population.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why some ethnic groups
are much more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than others.
(10 marks)

Stop and search statistics present a clear picture. In 2014, the A brief introduction with key
police stopped and searched 15 White, 65 Black, 23 Asian and knowledge goes on to identify
28 mixed race individuals per thousand in the population. the two reasons that will be
Why this difference in the rates of stop and search happened analysed which are both very
is less clear. While some sociologists put this down to clearly drawn from hooks in
institutional racism and the nature of police discretion, others the item.
suggest that black and minority‐ethnic individuals are more
likely to be out on the streets in high‐crime urban areas at the
times when stop and searches take place.

In 1999 the McPherson Report concluded that the This paragraph addresses the
Metropolitan Police was ‘institutionally racist’, and other first reason, police racism.
studies have shown evidence of extensive racism within the Plenty of evidence is provided
police force. A BBC undercover report (The Secret Policeman) in a succinct way.
found shocking evidence of racism in the Greater Manchester This paragraph is an
force, for example. The police choose who to stop and search. interesting alternative to a
Sociologists disagree about the cause(s) of the discriminatory PEEEL paragraph elsewhere,
ways police deploy their discretion. Potential causes include: depending more on analysis
individual police officers’ discriminatory views, a cultural than evaluation. A range of
issue within the police itself deriving from a conservative different explanations for
canteen culture, or a more structural, institutional issue. police racism are considered in
Marxists, for example, argue that the police’s job is to support an analytical way. Of course, it
the interests of the ruling class and control the proletariat. would have been possible to
The minority‐ethnic groups that are most likely to be stopped suggest a criticism of this view,
and searched are overwhelmingly working class; therefore, but that evaluation really
the inequality of stop and search statistics might be the police comes in the form of the
simply carrying out their role in a capitalist society, on behalf second reason.
of the bourgeoisie. Whether or not this explanation has merit,
discriminatory policing is one possible cause for some ethnic
groups being much more likely than others to be stopped and
searched. Clear link back to the question.

However, Waddington et al. (2003) suggested a very different The second reason also
explanation for these statistics. Their study looked at what provides evaluation for the
they called the ‘available population’ (i.e. those people who first one, making for an
could potentially be stopped and searched), and found that answer rich in AO3.

those who were stopped and searched were broadly Succinct description of the
proportional to the available population. In other words, stop study clearly applied to the
and searches took place at particular times of day and in question and evaluated.
particular areas (such as town centres) and there were many
more minority‐ethnic individuals in those areas at those
times. However, the police were actively involved in
Waddington’s study, so they could be accused of lacking
objectivity. Whatever the underlying cause, the characteristics
of the available population is one reason why some ethnic
groups are much more likely to be stopped and searched than Again a very clear link back to
others. the question.

[389 words]


This is comfortably in the top band: a very direct response with a brief introduction and then two
paragraphs that clearly address the question.

The answer is succinct with lots of key terms, concepts, examples and theories packed into the
two paragraphs. However, it is still readable and does not lose clarity by trying to say too much.

This question had very clear hooks in the item that it was important to pick up. However, a
reasonable answer could have taken two different explanations for police discrimination
(institutional racism and canteen culture, for instance) and this could still be said to have been
drawn from the item. However, the marker would want to see some engagement with the second
hook, referring to time and place.


ITEM A

Even today, boys and girls are often brought up very differently and taught different norms and values.
This can be seen both in family life and in expected adult job roles. Statistics suggest that men are much
more likely to commit crime than women.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which gender
socialisation might lead to gender differences in rates of offending. (10 marks)

Men are much more likely to commit crimes than women. A brief introduction sets the
Men commit 90% of murders, for example. Sociologists scene and gets straight to the
suggest a range of reasons for this, many of which relate to point with identifying two
gender norms. Two underlying reasons for this gender ways, clearly drawn from the
differential might be: women are socialised into the item.
expressive role in the family (to be nurturing and caring);
while men, traditionally at least, have been socialised to go
out to work and provide for the family.

Feminist sociologists, for instance Heidensohn, have noted A good PEEEL paragraph /
how the role women are expected to take in a patriarchal chain of reasoning that
society makes them less likely to commit crimes. Women are analyses and evaluates the
socialised into a domestic role (what Parsons called the first reason with clarity,
expressive role): they are expected to be nurturing and caring. revealing good sociological
Given their expected role and behaviour, women committing knowledge and understanding
violent crime would be doubly deviant, deviating both from and use of key terms.
society’s norms and values and from gender scripts. A key
element of this perspective is Heidensohn’s control theory.
From birth to adulthood, families exert greater control over
the behavior of girls, which forms part of the canalisation into
gender roles. Because they are controlled, they have fewer
opportunities to commit crime. Boys are much more likely to
be out in groups or alone at night when much criminality
takes place. However, liberationist feminists like Freda Adler
would argue that this is an outdated view; since the 1970s,
girls and women have had much more freedom. However, she
also notes the significant upsurge in female crime, which Chain of reasoning is
supports the view that socialisation into different roles within ultimately linked back very
the family lies behind gender differences in offending. explicitly to the question.

Traditionally, men were socialised to provide for the family The same approach is taken
and go out to work. In the past, women were more likely to be with the second way.
marginalised in a domestic role, while men had the
opportunities at work to commit occupational crime or to
make relationships outside the family that could lead to Plenty of analysis and
criminality. Furthermore, some argue that aspects of evaluation. Of course there are
masculinity are potentially criminal: toughness, independence plenty of other ways this chain
and even aggression. The social pressure to provide for the of reasoning could have gone,

family can lead to property crimes when men are unable to such as postmodern ideas
earn money or provide in other, legitimate ways. Again, this about a crisis of masculinity,
might be an outdated view; and other sociologists argue that etc. but the skill of being
men do not commit many more crimes than women; rather selective is also to the fore.
that, for a variety of reasons, such as the chivalry thesis, the
statistics are misleading. Nevertheless, socialisation into a
masculine gender role could account for gender differences in
criminality. Linked back to the question.

[403 words]


A top band response which very clear draws on two hooks from the item and develops them
successfully.

A brief introduction is used to give some useful background knowledge and clearly identify the
two ways that will be considered. Some markers might look at the second paragraph and feel
that multiple ways are presented (working, groups, masculinity, need to provide, etc.) but by
being clear in the introduction that this paragraph is all about men being socialised to go to
work and provide for the family, it unites these different strands. It is quite likely that when
explaining and analysing a point you find yourself making supplementary points that could be
read as being entirely separate points. A brief intro clearly identifying the points prevents
confusion on the reader’s part.

Clearly much more could have been included in this answer. In evaluation, chivalry thesis could
be explored, postmodern criticisms could have been raised, etc. However, it is important to
directly answer the question and be selective.


ITEM A

Some sociologists argue that there is an underclass in society whose members are more likely to commit
crimes than members of other social classes. They argue that this class has been created by government
welfare policies and is characterised by households in which nobody has a job.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why members of an
"underclass" might be more likely to commit crimes. (10 marks)

New Right sociologists, like Charles Murray, argue that the A clear introduction gives the
welfare state has created an underclass in society: theoretical background to the
dysfunctional workless families. They argue that members of question and identifies the two
this class are inclined towards criminality because of reasons that will be developed.
inadequate socialisation in single‐parent families, while left
realists would argue that such individuals are more likely to
offend because of relative deprivation.

Murray argues that government welfare policies give perverse A strong PEEEL paragraph
incentives for people to form lone‐parent families. The that makes the link between
children of such families, particularly boys, are inadequately this first reason and a hook in
socialised because they do not have a strong male role model. the item (government welfare
The absence of a father and his instrumental role, providing policies) absolutely clear.
discipline and a work ethic, means that children are likely to
engage in anti‐social behaviour. Tolerance of that behaviour
will, right realists like Wilson argue, lead to more serious
criminality. However, critics argue that the statistics used to
support this position are questionable; other factors like
social class, ethnicity or location might be more important.
Police statistics do not support the right realist idea that
involvement in anti‐social behaviour necessarily leads to
involvement in serious crime. However, the New Right argue
that the welfare state and the increase in single‐parent
families causes individuals from the underclass to commit Direct and explicit link to the
more crime. question.

Left realists like Lea and Young take a very different view. It is
not the family structures among deprived groups that leads to
criminality but the deprivation itself, particularly in relation
to other groups in society. As Merton explained in his strain The same approach is taken
theory, people are socialised into aiming for particular goals with the second reason. There
in society, and these are often material goals: nice houses, were a few ways to go with
expensive cars, and so on. In modern cities, people who have this (although “households in
these things and people who have no real hope of attaining which nobody has a job” was
them legitimately live side by side; and the wealthy and the obvious second hook) but
successful are presented in the media as being the norm. As left realism provides a good
such, relative deprivation – having less than others – can be a contrast with the first
major driving force for crime. Those who have no job and are paragraph.

reliant on government benefits, or who have employment but Clear reference to “those who
on zero‐hours contracts are therefore more likely to commit have no job” to ensure the
crimes than those with high incomes. The New Right would marker is aware which hook is
counter that there has always been poverty and inequality, being developed here.
but that crime rates increased significantly in the post‐war
period after the introduction of welfare policies that were
designed to make people less deprived but, they would argue,
caught them in a poverty trap. However, relative deprivation
is a convincing explanation for why members of a so‐called
underclass are more likely to commit crimes than others in Another clear, explicit link
society. back to the question.

[413 words]

Examiner Comments: Mark Band 8‐10

A top band answer that neatly answers the question. By including a short introduction followed
by two strong and well‐developed PEEEL paragraphs, all the assessment objectives are
addressed

While the New Right approach, considered in paragraph one, was an inevitable approach to take
given the item, there were plenty of possible routes to go with the second reason. While the likely
hook was joblessness, this could have been developed with Marxist ideas or indeed with strain or
subcultural theories. While left realism worked well, there are often multiple acceptable ways to
answer a question. Similarly, an extended example could have been included in the analysis, like
the UK riots of 2011. Again, there are many ways to answer these questions but the skill of
selecting what to write and what not to write is an important one to develop.


ITEM A

Many sociologists argue that the world is undergoing a process of globalisation, where it is becoming
ever more interconnected. This has positive benefits, like improved opportunities for travel and
communication, as well as negative effects like the erosion of local cultures or the loss of traditional jobs
in developed countries. It is also suggested that globalisation has a number of influences on crime and
deviance.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which globalisation might
be causing an increase in crime. (10 marks)

Many sociologists argue that societies are becoming A quick introduction briefly
globalised: the world is ever more inter‐connected. This defining the key term in the
greater global integration could lead to an increase in crime in question and clearly
two ways: improved global travel and communication identifying the two ways to be
creating new opportunities for criminality; the transfer of developed in the answer. These
manufacturing jobs to developing nations from developed clearly emerge from hooks in
countries increasing relative deprivation in the latter. the item.

While hyper‐globalists view the developments in travel and Good use of key terms and
communication since the middle of the 20th century in mixture of theory and
overwhelmingly positive terms, these very developments examples in this well‐
have enabled, or even created, a range of criminal activities. developed PEEEL paragraph.
The ease with which people and goods can travel around the
world is reflected in the black market of smuggling and
trafficking. People smugglers often exploit the people they
smuggle, taking them from a desperate situation in one
country then using them as illegal workers in the developed
world. The smuggling of products like illegal drugs is also
facilitated by the ease of global travel. The internet’s
communication revolution has also created a whole new array
of cyber‐crimes, e.g. identity fraud. Traditionalists, who Although this could seem like
question the whole concept of globalisation, argue that such two ways in the one
crimes have always existed, and that new technology has paragraph, the clear
always changed the nature of crime to some extent (like introduction put these
steamships or gunpowder); but nothing significant or new is together as “improved global
happening today. Many other sociologists disagree and think travel and communication”.
the globalisation of travel and communication, while mostly
positive, has transformed criminality. Clear link back to the question.

Pessimistic globalists point to the way globalisation has had a The same approach taken with
negative impact on the traditional working‐class communities the second way.
in the developed world. Manufacturing industries like
steelworks and coalmines have been exported to countries
with much lower labour costs leaving concentrated areas of
joblessness. The subsequent relative deprivation is, according
to left realists, a key cause of crime. People living in largely

prosperous countries may find themselves lacking many of
the material goods enjoyed by their compatriots, and feel left
behind. As well as driving property crime, globalisation may
also propel political extremism, and in developing countries
the sense that their cultures and identities are being eroded
by a global culture, both of which may result in criminal
activity. Hyper‐globalists would question this and suggest
that globalisation is a driver of growth and prosperity. But the Some useful evaluation,
high rates of crime and unemployment in ex‐mining areas of grounded in a theoretical
the UK or ex‐steel areas of the USA suggest that globalisation framework and then a very
could be causing crime through relative deprivation. clear link back to the question.

[399 words]


A top‐band response which quickly and succinctly identifies two hooks in the item and develops
them into a clear response to the question.

There is a clear theoretical framework and knowledge and understanding of the theories
mentioned is sound. A wide range of potential criminality is referred to and successfully linked to
the question. Although there is not a direct reference to the item (as in “As explained in Item A...”)
there is an echoing of the language of the item in order to signpost that a hook has been
responded to.

A logical chain of reasoning, essentially following the classic “PEEEL” structure, in both
paragraphs notches up plenty of AO3 marks for both analysis and evaluation.


ITEM A

Green crime is crime committed against the environment, rather than against a human victim. This could
include pollution or animal cruelty. There is a debate between those who take a traditional approach and
are only interested in green crime that breaks the law, and those who consider all harm to the
environment to be green crime, regardless of whether a law has been broken

Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why a minority of green
crimes are prosecuted by the criminal justice system. (10 marks)

Green criminology is a concept first introduced by M. J. Lynch Snappy introduction explains
in 1990. Green crime is defined as crime committed against green crime and identifies the
the environment itself. Two reasons why such crimes may fail two reasons that are being
to be prosecuted by the criminal justice system are: first, developed, both drawn from
there is often no clear victim and second, not always have the item.
laws been broken.

Whether you take an anthropocentric approach to green Lots of key terms used. These
crime or an ecocentric one (i.e. whether your main concern is are briefly defined (which is
the human cost or the ecological one), many green crimes do good practice if you have
not have a human victim. Crimes like pollution or animal time).
cruelty, as in the item, are therefore less likely to be reported
to the police than burglary or assault. Most crimes that are The point is explained with
prosecuted have been reported to the police by the public. examples and then there is the
However, a lot of green crime does have a direct human usual detailed analysis and
victim. If a water course is being polluted, or there is illegal evaluation, featuring further
fly‐tipping, landowners or local residents are likely to report key terms.
it. Similarly, while animals themselves cannot report crimes,
there are various pressure groups and concerned citizens
who will take up cases on their behalf. Also, while primary
green crime is arguably often victimless, secondary green
crime (criminality in order to avoid environmental
regulations or censure) often does have a victim.
Nevertheless, the lack of directly affected human victims in
many green crimes can account for large numbers not being Explicit link back to the
prosecuted. question.

A more significant issue in relation to the prosecution of green The candidate includes some
crime is that green criminology is often transgressive: it is analysis even within putting
concerned less about illegality and more about harm. Many forward the two points, by
examples of environmental harm are not illegal, at least not in considering their relative
the countries where they are happening. It is therefore significance.
impossible for such “crimes” to be prosecuted through the
criminal justice system. Instead, international pressure, Again examples are included.
including from non‐governmental organisations like It would have been possible to
Greenpeace, is the way the issues may be resolved. Green expand this further with
crime is often global in character. Deforestation in one specific reference to logging in

country can lead to flash floods in another. If the deforestation Nepal and flooding in
is legal in the country where it occurs, there is little the Bangladesh. There is certainly
victims can do about it. Many sociologists of crime and no reason not to include this,
deviance would argue that legal acts which cause harm to the although this response is
environment should not be considered to be crimes at all. already on the long side.
However, for those sociologists who do take a transgressive Similarly, the evaluation could
approach, the legality of much green crime inevitably means be more brief. Clear link back
that much of it is not prosecuted. to the question.

[403 words]

Examiner Comments: Mark Band 8‐10

A top band response. It includes a number of quite difficult concepts. In other topic areas, it might
be possible to refer to a concept with definition, because it’s a familiar concept across sociology,
but things like anthropocentric or transgression do need some explanation. An answer could
pack in fewer concepts and still hit the top band.

This is clear and follows the now familiar structure of a brief introduction and two full, well‐
developed PEEEL paragraphs. Sometimes people forget about linking to the question, and it’s
very important in these questions as the marker needs to be very clear what the two points are
and that they directly address the question.


ITEM A

Situational crime prevention strategies assume that the choice to commit a crime is a rational one, made
after weighing up the benefits against the risks. These strategies are intended to reduce the
opportunities for the committing of crimes. An example would be the installation of a burglar alarm to
reduce the risk of being burgled.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why situational crime
prevention strategies may not be effective in reducing crime. (10 marks)

Situational crime prevention (SCP) strategies are popular A quick introduction explains
with local councils and property owners. They include terms and highlights the two
designing out (e.g. homelessness spikes) or target hardening reasons (clearly linked to
(e.g. anti‐vandal paint). Two reasons why they might be hooks in the item). Be cautious
ineffective are that criminals do not necessarily make a with abbreviations, one or two
rational choice to offend, and criminality may just be unfamiliar ones clearly
displaced rather than prevented. labelled first time is fine to
help time management, but
Postmodern sociologists, like Katz and Lyng, question essays full of “wc, rc, avp” etc.
whether criminals really make a rational choice to offend. For test the marker’s good will!
target hardening to prevent a crime, a burglar must see a
burglar alarm and decide that the risk of being caught A link to some theory and a
outweighs the possible benefits, and so choose not to offend. clear point, well explained,
For many, though, criminality is about the buzz and the risk, analysed, evaluated and linked
and the desire to avoid boredom, rather than a rational back to the question.
calculation. For those seeking a buzz from risk taking, in
particular, the higher the risk, the greater the buzz.
Yet there is evidence that burglar alarms reduce the risk of
burglary, for instance. While some anti‐social behaviour might
be about risk taking (therefore anti‐vandal paint might seem
like a challenge) for more serious crime, the risk of getting
caught, and the potential punishments, do act as a deterrent.
However, it is clear that for some minor crime, such as graffiti,
SCP strategies might simply up the stakes and produce a
greater thrill.

A more practical difficulty with SCP is that of displacement. The same approach taken
While burglar alarms or CCTV might deter a crime in that again with quite a detailed
particular location, it may only succeed in displacing the explanation of displacement
crime, and therefore fail to reduce crime overall. Widespread and the introduction of some
use of CCTV in town centres, for example, has arguably other related concepts.
pushed criminality into other areas of town where there is
less surveillance. Once crimes such as drug dealing and
soliciting move into other areas, they can reach a “tipping
point” and cause a neighbourhood to become associated with
criminality. Installing SCP strategies there merely displaces
the problem again. Target hardening merely pushes criminals

towards softer targets. If burglars avoid homes with alarms,
they do not give up burglary altogether, instead they
concentrate on properties without alarms. Of course, the
greater and more widespread the use of SCP, arguably the
fewer soft targets are available and this could ultimately
reduce the crime rate; but affordability would ensure that not A succinct but detailed
all potential targets were protected. Therefore, the likelihood analysis and evaluation
is that SCP strategies will continue to displace crime rather ultimately links back to the
than reduce it. question.

[388 words]


A very clear, succinct response which is comfortably in the top band. It contrasts well with the
Green Crime response to show how a similar mark can be attained with fewer words. It is still
rich with concepts and those that might be unfamiliar are fully explained.

A clear understanding of situational crime prevention is demonstrated, the two reasons are very
clearly linked to two recognisable hooks in the item, and the reasons are subject to some well‐
argued analysis and evaluation.

As with other responses, plenty of other content could have been included, such as comparing
with alternative forms of crime prevention and that would have been a perfectly acceptable
avenue of analysis and evaluation. However, it is important to be selective and not to throw
everything at these 10 mark questions. In a 30 mark question about crime prevention, all those
other points would be highly appropriate.


ITEM A

Some groups in society are much more likely to be the victims of crime than others. For example
younger people, including students, also unemployed people and those on low incomes are statistically
more likely to be a victim of a crime than people who are older or wealthier.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which people’s
characteristics or behaviour might contribute to being a victim of crime.
(10 marks)

Positivist victimology suggests that people’s behaviour or A quick introduction which
characteristics increase their likelihood of being a victim of places the question in a
crime. Young people putting themselves in risky situations, theoretical framework and
and the least well‐off not having money to spend on identifies the two ways to be
protecting themselves are two ways which may exemplify the developed (clearly linking to
Positivist persepctive. hooks in the item).

Young people are the age group most at risk of becoming A classic PEEEL paragraph
victims, according to data from the Crime Survey of England with extensive explanation,
and Wales (CSEW). One reason for this is that they are more evidence and evaluation and
likely to put themselves in vulnerable situations. People in (very importantly) a clear link
their late teens and early twenties often drink to excess back to the question.
(making them vulnerable), go out late at night and generally
have a more carefree, even reckless, attitude to their own
safety. However, some sociologists would criticise this
explanation and suggest that it is victim blaming. Just because
someone gets drunk or stays out late does not mean that they
are responsible for the criminal actions of another person.
Criminals have agency and choose to commit crimes,
irrespective of the behaviour of their victims. Nevertheless,
the recklessness of youth is one way in which someone’s
behaviour or characteristics could contribute to victimhood.

CSEW data also shows that those on the lowest incomes, The same approach is taken
especially the unemployed, are also at a heightened risk of for both paragraphs. This
victimisation. Positivist victimology again seeks to explain this approach picks up plenty of
in terms of behaviour and characteristics. There are various marks for all assessment
precautions that can be taken to protect oneself from crime, objectives.
but these cost money. Home security systems, for example,
are expensive, as are modern cars with hi‐tech security
systems. One precaution people might take is to stay away
from areas with high crime rates, but this is impossible if you
live in one. However, Marxist sociologists would criticise this
perspective and say that working‐class people are more likely
to be victims for structural reasons, rather than because of
their own behaviour. Logically you would expect the rich to be
at greatest risk of crime as they have more to steal, but the

state’s role is to protect the rich from the crimes of the poor.
According to Marxists, the state does very little to protect the
poor. They would argue further that living in areas with high
crime rates and not being able to afford expensive security is By writing a clear chain of
the result of the structure of a capitalist society, not individual reasoning, it is possible to
behaviour. However, not paying for the best protection from essentially hold a discussion
crime is another way in which people’s behaviour or about the topic, while
characteristics can contribute to their own victimhood. maintaining readability.

[410 words]

Examiner Comments: Mark Band:8‐10

A top‐band answer that gets straight down to answering the question. The brief introduction is
helpful in that it provided an opportunity to set the question in a theoretical framework
(positivist victimology). This immediately shows the marker that the candidate has a good
knowledge of victimisation and will go beyond a common sense extension of the item (which
would be the nature of many answers to this question).

By linking the answer and the hooks from the item to knowledge of the Crime Survey of England
and Wales, the candidate again reveals good levels of knowledge and application. The response
then goes on to be analytical and evaluative and directly links back to the question.


ITEM A

Sociologists debate the purpose of punishment. Some argue that if criminals make a rational choice to
offend, when they see people are punished severely for their transgressions, they should make a rational
choice not to offend. Others emphasise the need for criminals to reform their ways.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which punishment can
prevent further crime. (10 marks)

For sociologists, the purposes of punishment can be summed A very clear introduction
up as prevention, compensation and retribution. Two ways in which essentially “decodes” the
which punishment can perform the role of prevention are hooks in the item to identify
deterrence and rehabilitation. two ways to consider.

The idea that punishment can act as a deterrent to further A classic PEEEL paragraph
crime is based on rational choice theory. As stated in the item, that includes plenty of key
if offenders weigh up the benefits and costs of criminality concepts and some theory.
rationally, then the more severe the punishment the more This is the sort of question
likely they are to choose not to offend. This view is supported where it would be easy to miss
by right realists who favour tough sentences even for minor out any sociological theory, so
offences, in order to prevent more serious crime. However, including postmodernism and
some postmodern sociologists like Lyng (1990) argue that right realism makes it
part of the reason why crime is seductive is because of the sufficiently sociological.
thrill of taking risks. Therefore, arguably the risk could
increase the “buzz”. Also some crime is not rational but is
instead committed out of frustration or when under the
influence of alcohol or drugs. However, it seems likely that Linked back to the question
tough sentences do deter some types of crime. within the chain of reasoning.

Punishment can also prevent further crime through the The second way is addressed in
rehabilitation of offenders. The purpose of punishment is not the same way, with a PEEL
just to deter others from committing crime but to correct the paragraph.
flawed values of offenders so they can return to society as
reformed citizens and not commit future crimes. If this is a
key purpose of punishment, its lack of effectiveness can be
criticised: reoffending rates are high for those who have
served custodial sentences. Indeed, prisons can act as a form
of subculture where criminals only socialise with other
criminals, normalising and reinforcing crime and deviance Again this is made more
even more. This is partly due to what Sutherland called sociological by linking an
differential association: prisoners associate with criminals, otherwise “common sense”
and therefore learn deviant values. New Right sociologists, point to relevant sociological
who support prison as the best form of punishment, argue theory.
that reoffending rates are due to prison reforms having made
prisons less unpleasant; that the best way to rehabilitate
offenders is to deter them from future crime through their

experience of prison. They also support prison’s role of
incapacitation ‐ people cannot commit further crimes if they
are in prison. Nevertheless, one aim of punishment is to A clear link back to the
rehabilitate offenders and prevent them from reoffending. question.

[369 words]


A top‐band answer that avoids one of the potential pitfalls for a general punishment question.
Many of the points that can be made about punishment are not especially sociological (they
could equally be made in a citizenship essay, for example). It is therefore useful to link the points
to sociological theory in order to lift the AO3 marks out of the middle band.

The hooks in the item were very clear, but the knack here is to develop them in a clear,
sociological way which explicitly answers the question.


ITEM A

Howard Becker points out that people react differently to the same act depending on who is doing it and
where they are doing it. This influences whether the act in question is labelled as deviant or not, as in the
saying “one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter”.

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which the social context

of an act might influence whether or not it is labelled as deviant. (10 marks)

The idea that the social context of an act influences how it is A succinct and useful
labelled and therefore how the criminal justice system might introduction that establishes a
respond to it has been raised by both Howard Becker and theoretical framework and
Aaron Cicourel. Two ways the context might influence identifies the two ways which
perception: who is performing the act, and where they are are to be developed.
performing the act.

Cicourel argued that the label of delinquency was placed on This is the stronger of the two
juveniles from low income backgrounds but not on better‐off ‘ways’, in terms of linking to
youths doing exactly the same things. He identified two stages sociological theory (although
of what he called the ‘negotiation of justice.’ First, the police both can relate to Becker or
will be influenced by their stereotypes of the typical criminal. Cicourel). It is a clear PEEEL
Therefore, they will view drunk and disorderly behaviour by a paragraph with plenty of
middle‐class student differently to the same behaviour by a theory and useful examples.
homeless youth. The former will be seen as normal student
high‐jinx, the latter as deviance. The actions of the Bullingdon
Club (a notorious student society for the very rich at Oxford
University) has always been interpreted differently from that
of an inner‐city youth gang, even though some of the activities
would be very similar. Yet there are examples of the opposite
happening, with a millionaire’s daughter who drove looters
around London in the 2011 riots receiving a higher sentence Working through this example
because of her privileged background. However, even if the provides some useful
negotiation of justice sometimes works against the rich, it is development. The evaluation
still an example of the social context influencing the comes through a contrasting
application of the label. example.

As well as who is committing the act, the place in which it Linked back to the question,
happens is also a factor. Drunk and disorderly behaviour in a clearly.
town centre is treated differently from the same in a quiet
residential area, for example. When radical Muslims travelled The second paragraph is
from Britain and elsewhere to Libya to fight against General arguably less sociological than
Ghadafi, they were allowed to travel and were praised for the first. The theoretical
fighting against a presumed tyrannical regime. When people framework is really the same
made similar journeys to Syria, the label switched from as the first way, and it would
“freedom fighter” to terrorist. In both countries, some people waste time in the exam to
joined groups like ISIS, but different attitudes to the conflicts repeat the point. However, the

meant that the label changed. However, arguably this was not answer could be strengthened
because it was a different place, but instead because the further with more theoretical
interpretation of British interests had changed: i.e. that evaluation. Again the
returning ISIS fighters posed a threat to the UK. It is clear that evaluation comes through the
the same act carried out in different places can be labelled example, followed by a clear
very differently. link to the question.

[387 words]


This is a top‐band answer to quite a difficult question. The item is quite clear and the hooks easily
identified. However, what is more difficult is finding different ways to develop the two ways that
emerge from the hooks. It is really two aspects of social context and both best relate to Cicourel’s
Negotiation of Justice, or to Becker’s labelling theory. It is important not only to identify two
ways, linked to the item and develop them, but to ensure that the two ways are clearly distinct
from one another. This response succeeds in doing this, partly by basing much of the analysis and
evaluation around examples rather than the theoretical framework.

However, it would have been possible (and would have attained good marks) to use contrasting
theory to evaluate in one of the paragraphs. For example, in the first paragraph, Marxism could
have been used to argue that Cicourel ignored the capitalist structure of society, or realism could
have been used in the second paragraph to question the usefulness of classing “terrorism” as a
label, rather than a real problem.


NOTES

CRIME & DEVIANCE 10 MARKERS

1. Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which deviant subcultures respond to
blocked opportunities. (10 marks)
2. Using Item A analyse two ways in which society’s response to crime and deviance benefits the
ruling class. (10 marks)
3. Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why right realist approaches to crime and
deviance might ‘achieve control but not justice.’ (10 marks)
4. Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why some ethnic groups are much more
likely to be stopped and searched by the police than others. (10 marks)
5. Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which gender socialisation might lead to
gender differences in rates of offending. (10 marks)
6. Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why members of an “underclass” might be
more likely to commit crimes. (10 marks)
7. Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which globalisation might be causing an
increase in crime. (10 marks)
8. Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why a minority of green crimes are pros-
ecuted by the criminal justice system. (10 marks)
9. Applying material from Item A, analyse two reasons why situational crime prevention strategies
may not be effective in reducing crime. (10 marks)
10. Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which people’s characteristics or behaviour
might contribute to being a victim of crime. (10 marks)

More Psychology revision and support at:
www.tutor2u.net/sociology
@tutor2usoc ALevelSociologyStudentGroup tutor2usoc

Crime Deviance Model Answers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crime Deviance Model Answers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crime Deviance Model Answers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AQA A Level

Topic TEN MARKERS

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

Applying material from Item A, analyse two ways in which the social context

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

CRIME & DEVIANCE 10 MARKERS

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

@tutor2usoc ALevelSociologyStudentGroup tutor2usoc

You might also like