The Neutralization of Criminal Offense

Abstract

A previously untested proposition from Sykes and Matza's neutralization theory is that certain types of offenders will favor certain types of neutralizing excuses. Murderers, for example. may tend toward denial of responsibility or denial of the victim. A competing hypothesis, derived from Hindelang's challenges to neutralization and drift theories, is that offenders would favor excuses keyed to offenses similar to their own. Robbers, for example, may favor excuses for robbery over excuses for other offenses. regardless of the content of the excuses themselves. The data presented in this article, based on o survey of inmates in four Florida prisons, fail to support either hypothesis. This may suggest that the two perspectives from which the hypotheses are derived are overly simplistic‐that the nature of crime and delinquency is more subtle and complex than indicated by either the subcultural or antisubcultural theoretical traditions.

Neutralization theory and online software piracy: An empirical analysis

“…Other scholars have introduced four other a priori rationalizations: metaphor of the ledger (Klockars 1974;Minor 1980), and claim of normalcy, denial of negative intent, and claim of relative acceptability (Henry 1990). Metaphor of the ledger (''if you weigh all of my good deeds against my bad deeds, you'll see I'm a decent person'') involves comparing one's good deeds with the current questionable deed, thereby excusing this one particular instance of wrongdoing.…”

Predicting Deviant Behavior by Neutralization: Myths and Findings

“…During the past 45 years of research and practice in dealing with norm violating behavior, neutralization theory has been assigned considerable importance for the explanation and prevention of deviant behavior in the fields of general delinquency and crime (e.g., Agnew and Peters 1986;Amelang, Schahn, and Kohlmann 1988;Atkinson 1999;Ball 1966;Egg and Sponsel 1978;Hindelang 1970;Khoo and Oakes 2000;Landsheer, T'Hart, and Kox 1994;Minor 1980;Norris and Dodder 1979;Rogers and Buffalo 1974;Schwarz and Bayer 1989;Shields and Whitehall 1994;Strutton, Vitell, and Pelton 1994;Teevan and Dryburgh 2000;Thurman 1984;Winkel 1997), violence and 1 When not otherwise indicated, the gender specifying expressions refer to both sexes.…”

Digital Piracy Justification

“…In sum, Asian students clearly show a significantly more favorable attitude toward digital piracy justification and such justification is based on the techniques of neutralization (Henry, 1990;Klockars, 1974;Minor, 1980Minor, , 1981Sykes & Matza, 1957). It seems Asian international students are more likely to deny injury by arguing no one is really getting hurt in digital piracy.…”