Criminal Justice Review

Despite the popularity of neutralization theory, numerous issues about the theory still exist. This study examines the stability of neutralization acceptance, the role of neutralization acceptance on self-reported delinquency, and the impact of social bonds on neutralization acceptance. Analyses were conducted using data culled from one cohort of respondents to the Denver Youth Survey. These issues are explored via structural equation modeling with measures of neutralization acceptance that are contextualized to specific subtypes of delinquency. The findings suggest that neutralization acceptance is a more robust predictor of delinquency than delinquency is of neutralizing attitudes, and that some of these effects are generally stable across time. However, many of these effects operate differently across types of delinquency and sometimes across levels of social bonds. Implications for theoretical development and for future research are discussed.

Occupational white-collar offenders are individuals who commit their offenses while in a position of trust and fiduciary responsibility within the respective company. Much has been written about their motivations and actual offenses; however, minimal empirical progress has been made determining whether the presence of an actual learning process exists that may inspire, encourage, or entice an individual to commit such crimes. Moreover, the research narrows further when attempting to determine whether a set of linguistic phrases that allows individuals to justify their crimes prior to commission may also be learned. Thus, the aim of this project was to understand the learning process behind occupational offenses, more specifically, do those we associate with provide neutralizations that may allow us to commit an occupational crime? To answer this question, 40 federally incarcerated occupational white-collar offenders were queried using semistructured one-on-one interviews. The results indicate that there is some empirical support for the notion that neutralizing language may in fact be learned from certain groups that we interact with both on and off the job. These findings suggest that further empirical investigation is warranted.

Neutralization theory has commonly been used to understand the motivations of street offending, and recent studies have examined the use of neutralization techniques by corporate and white-collar offenders to account for their crimes. However, few researchers have explored whether this process is gendered. Using data from master of business administration (MBA) students, this study examines how gender influences intentions to inhibit or promote the sale of Panalba, a hypothetical pharmaceutical drug known to harm people, as well as how gender moderates the relationship between techniques of neutralization and corporate offending decisions. Results show that while there are bivariate gender differences in corporate offending decisions and in some of the techniques of neutralization, there are few gender differences in the effect of techniques of neutralization on corporate offending decisions. Directions for future research are highlighted.

Since Sutherland first addressed the topic, it has been well known that white-collar offenders do not regard themselves or their actions as criminal. Almost without exception white-collar offenders deny that they had a guilty mind when committing their offenses. Indeed, a distinguishing feature of the psychological makeup of white-collar offenders is thought to be their ability to neutralize the moral bind of the law and rationalize their criminal behavior. Although white-collar offenders are assumed to be different than other types of offenders in how they think about their crimes, no research has compared white-collar to other offenders on this matter. The current study fills this gap in the literature by comparing a sample of federal prison inmates convicted of white-collar offenses with a sample convicted of other types of offenses. Findings indicate that white-collar offenders may not have different thinking patterns as previously thought.

This research is a case study of a “semiretired” career criminal. The subject, George, an 82-year-old career offender admits to over 200 arrests and numerous convictions between age 16 and the present. He has served over 20 years in state and federal prisons for racketeering, arson, burglary, and other serious offenses. The authors conducted in-depth interviews with George regularly over a 6-month period. Despite his openness regarding his criminal career and attachment to the criminal subculture in which he flourished, he readily made use of techniques of neutralization and despite his reputation as a local criminal godfather, considers himself a good person. George was unusual in that he was proud of his criminal reputation but also thought of himself and wished to be perceived by others as a good person. The use of neutralizations allowed him to maintain these two diametrically opposed perceptions of self. The authors conclude that due to over 60 years of cognitive distortions through the use of techniques of neutralizations, the subject has compartmentalized his diametrically opposed perceptions of self to the point where he believes them both. The authors borrow the term doublethink from George Orwell’s book, 1984, to describe this phenomenon.