Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

This article was downloaded by: [University of Chicago] On: 09 January 2013, At: 22:49 Publisher: Routledge Informa

Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Deviant Behavior
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/udbh20

Selfesteem and anomie: An integration of Adler and Merton as a theory of deviance


R. A. Steffenhagen
a a

University of Vermont, Department of Sociology, 31 South Prospect Street, Burlington, VT, 05405 Version of record first published: 18 May 2010. To cite this article: R. A. Steffenhagen (1984): Selfesteem and anomie: An integration of Adler and Merton as a theory of deviance, Deviant Behavior, 5:1-4, 23-30 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639625.1984.9967629

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/ terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or

damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

SELF-ESTEEM AND ANOMIE: AN INTEGRATION OF ADLER AND MERTON AS A THEORY OF DEVIANCE

R. A. STEFFENHAGEN University of Vermont

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

The purpose of t h i s paper i s t o show t h a t while anomie theory on the s o c i a l level o f f e r s a valid explanation of deviance, in order t o understand the phenomenon i n i t s e n t i r e t y , we must consider t h e individual level as well. The psycho-dynamic d i mension of individual action i s a c r u c i a l component of deviant behavior and one which must be integrated i n t o a broader theory of o v e r a l l deviance. With t h i s in mind we w i l l attempt t o i n t e g r a t e t h e s o c i a l and t h e psychological by incorporating the Adlerian and Mertonian models in order t o c r e a t e a more dynamic theory of deviance.

INTRODUCTION Adler coined t h e term "individual psychology" t o r e f e r t o what i s r e a l l y a self-esteem theory of behavior, (see Ansbacher, 1956 p.3). Self-esteem he argued, i s the basic motivating force of behavior and the goal of the individual i s t o build, or a t l e a s t p r o t e c t , a f r a g i l e self-esteem. Adler's concept of organ i n f e r i o r i t y presupposes t h a t we a r e born i n f e r i o r ; t h a t we s t r i v e t o reduce t h i s i n f e r i o r i t y ; and t h a t we move toward s u p e r i o r i t y . As we progress toward t h i s goal, we begin t o f e e l good about ourselveswe develop self-esteem. The ultimate mechanism for protecting i s suicide - we would r a t h e r d i e than lose the l i t t l e esteem which i s l e f t . Alfred Adler and William James, both humanists, saw self-esteem as a key concept i n understanding human behavior. James (1890) defined self-esteem as: Success Pretentions In t h a t time period t h e term p r e t e n t i o n r e f e r r e d t o : aim, i n t e n t i o n , purpose or goal. lierefore, success i n a t t a i n i n g our goals would produce good self-esteem. In another context we might view pretentions as a s p i r a t i o n s - what we a s p i r e t o and t h e corresponding success would be t h e attainment of our goals.
Deviant Behavior, 5:23-30, 1984 Copyright 1984 by Hemisphere Publishing Corporation 23

24

R.A. STEFFENHA GEN

Merton's (1938) theory of deviance suggests that when a disjuncture between means and ends occurs, anomie ensues. James F. Short, J r . (1964) expresses this in the formula: Expectations Aspirations
= Deviance

where expectations can be translated into Merton's ends or goals and aspirations into the means. Translating the sociological paradigm into the psychological we have:

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

James

Short

Merton

Success _ Expectations _ Ends _ Deviance Pretentions Aspirations Means Self-esteem Short's formula helps to clarify our two concepts - self-esteem and deviance. When we cannot achieve our goals or obtain the desired ends set forth by society we have low self-esteem. This i s an expansion of Merton's scheme indicating that even the thought that we might not be able to obtain our goals, can lead to deviance. The three formulae imply that these psycho-dynamic and socio-dynamic conditions cannot be separated. James' - success/pretentions are based on societal values; Short's - expectations/aspirations are psychological conditions conforming to Merton's social/structural leading us to the proposition that low self-esteem becomes the basic psycho-dynamic mechanism underlying deviance. In the psycho-dynamic model, lack of success in the means/ends scheme leads to low self-esteem. In the anomie model, either lack of success or lack of perceived means leads to anomie-deviance. The problem with the latter paradigm is that i t cannot predict the occurrence or type of deviance but can only explain behavior after the fact. The psycho-dynamic model also fails to explain the type of deviance but does account for intra-psychic dissatisfaction. Anomie theory is the sociological counterpart of the self-esteem theory of psychology; together they provide a more predictive model. The Mertonian scheme, when used alone, f a i l s to predict the type of deviance to expect as well as failing to account for certain types of deviances. Further, i t often cannot distinguish between cause and effect of deviant behavior. The following l i s t illustrates some of these major areas of difficulty: Proposition 1: Alcoholism may not be a form of retreatism as traditionally defined. Retreatism may be a consequence of alcohol abuse rather than a source. Opiate addiction may work in opposition to retreatism - an antidote to the behavior. Drugs may intensify, rather than resolve, inner anomie generated conflict. Deviance without disjunctive means-ends: Violation of fish and game laws by Native Americans

Proposition 2: Proposition 3: Proposition 4:

SELF-ESTEEM AND ANOMIE

25

Proposition 5:

Promiscuity Statutory Rape Marijuana Use Running Amuck - deviance which has no basis in anomie but i s transitory or even a one-time occurrence.

(For a discussion of these and other weaknesses of anomie theory, see Clinard, 1964.) By integrating the theories of anomie and selfesteem, some of these problems can be eliminated.

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

Table 1 illustrates the connective link between the two models. Each heading will be defined in order to clarify their meaning. Groups. Three groups are used to cover Adler's goal orientations. Group I refers to positive goals or behavior which are on the socially useful side of l i f e . Group II includes Adler's 'godlike' goals. Although these ends would benefit society, they are set so high that they are unachievable. This case i s illustrated by a surgeon whose goal is to save each and every patient under his care. Group I I I refers to those individuals whose orientation is on the socially useless side of life-selfish and/or destructive; zB. (the Mafia) individuals who are successful at the expense of others. Goals. In our model under goals, we have two categories; the structural goals of Merton and the individual goals of Adler. Action. I t i s important to specify the types of action used to achieve desired goals. In this instance, the action i s either active or passive; active meaning the individual puts forth an energy output to achieve what he/she desires, passive meaning he/she tends to look for goal attainment without a great deal of psychic energy. Behavior. Active action is followed by direct behavior for goal achievement and passive action by substitute or compensatory behavior. Means. This refers to Merton's legitimate or illegitimate means category. Classification. This cuts across a l l goal categories. For simplicity, we have constructed the classes in terms of occupational differences and behavioral categories. Self-esteem. Adler's high or low self-esteem; feelings of self-worth.

Anomie. Merton's categories. In group I (Table 1), if we look at a structurally positive goal which is socially useful and employing and active approach in which the individual utilizes direct behavior and normative means the resulting classification is a functioning member of society. Behavior is legitimate since the individual i s employed in a legitimately structured institution in which the means are positive and self-esteem is high. In the case where action i s passive, the individual accepts the appropriate goals but lacks sufficient motivation to pursue them

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

TABLE 1. Means Normative Deviant Self-esteem High Low

Group

Structural Merton

Individual Adler

Action behavior

Classification

Anomie

Active Direct

Socially useful Passive S u b s t i t u t e

Professionals W . C . workers B . C . workers Welfare Conformist Or Obesity Drug abuse Family violence Delinquency Crime etc. Innovator Professionals W . C . workers B . C . workers Welfare Conformist Plus Obesity Drug abuse Family violence Delinquency Crime etc. Innovator

Active Direct

II

God-like Passive Substitute

Active Direct

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

Ill

Socially useless Passive Substitute

Tyrant Crime Delinquency Neurotic Ritualist And Occultist Neurosis Drug Abuse Retreatist

28

R.A. STEFFENHA GEN

actively. His/her behavior may become substituted (compensatory); he/she can substitute one action for another. For example, instead of training to be a successful athlete, the individual may use the Freudian defense mechanism of compensation and, thus, daydream about making the winning touchdown. The classification could be innovator resulting in personal or social deviance. In the case of social deviance i t i s possible that present deviance may became a new social norm at a later time; the Christian cult becoming Christianity. In group I I we have the structural means but the Adlerian god-like goals which will lead to deviance. In this situation, the action can be active or passive behavior, direct or substitute; although the means may be normative or deviant, the individual's inability to attain the goals suggests that self-esteem i s doomed to be eminently low. The resulting behavior type would be deviant on the personal level even if acceptable on the social level. The classification in this case, would be conformist or innovatoran acceptance of the goals with either an acceptance or rejection of the means but the resulting behavior would be deviant, regardless of the social orientation towards action. The successful college student might become a poly-drug abuser. In group I I I we have rejection of the structural goals; a category consistent with Adler's notion of socially useless goals. The individual desires personal gratification but not necessarily in the structured system or for the betterment of community. Here, action could be active or passive; behavior could be direct or substitute; the means normative or deviant; and self-esteem could be high or low. The resulting behavior type could be the tyrant (Hitler or Napoleon) with high self-esteem but no social interest. On the other hand, this combination could yield the occultist, who seeks immediate gratification without concern for others. Finally, this could also produce the delinquent with high self-esteem but socially useless goals and hence, defined as deviant. These classifications would be r i t u a l i s t or retreatist. In this instance, Merton's r i t u a l i s t could have high or low self-esteem. He would be deviant only if he had low self-esteem in the Mertonian sense, but always deviant under the Adlerian model if his goals were socially useless. Earlier, in proposition I, we noted that alcoholism may not actually be a form of retreatism since retreatist behavior may result from, rather than cause, alcoholism. In this instance we would have an example of the group II categorization: positive goals, god-like, active, direct, normative, professional etc., but the resulting low self-esteem would divert the individual into deviance-anomie. On the intrapsychic level, he would not be retreating from society but retreating from himself. The use of alcohol would be a means of escaping or coping with his feelings of low self-esteem. In proposition I I , we suggest that opiate addiction may be the opposite of retreatism; an antidote to retreatism. In this instance,
1

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

Used only an an example, in reality Hitler probably had low selfesteem.

SELF-ESTEEM AND ANOMIE

29

the action would be passive/substitute and in terms of means-deviant. The social class would be any of those listed, but when accompanied by low self-esteem the behavior would be a deviant coping mechanism both socially and personally. Thus, although the individual actively participates in drug addictions, he holds a l l the values of his/her successful professional friends, but also uses substitutive behavior replacing positive motivation with addiction (if I did not have this addiction, I would be successful). Thus, in the Adlerian framework we can explain opiate addiction as an antidote to retreating. "I retreat but cannot face my retreating, therefore, I use drugs; drugs become my excuse for my failure."

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

In proposition I I I drugs may intensify, rather than resolve, inner anomic generated conflict. In this instance, the individual might use drugs, but they do not become an acceptable substitute activity. Moreover, his/her psychic pain is further intensified by the behavior. This example cannot be explained in terms of the Mertonian model of anomie. Deviance without disjunctive means-ends can be understood in the Adlerian paradigm as a case in which low self-esteem becomes the basis for deviant behavior. In proposition IV, in the case of promiscuity, the individual has accepted the cultural means-ends but because of low self-esteem, uses sexual activity as a coping mechanism. In this instance, we can have a very successful college student who accepts the cultural goals, has accepted the cultural means but who, for other internal reasons, has low self-esteem. He/she then seeks a compensatory form of behavior to help bolster self-esteem, while at the same time operating successfully in the social system. To understand this type of behavior, subcultural values must be explored along with self-esteem levels. In the case of marijuana use, for example, we must look for the reason for i t s continued use. The individual may begin use because of positive subcultural values but may abuse because of low self-esteem. Marijuana use cannot be explained in the Mertonian paradigm. Statutory rape would be explained in terms of low self-esteem resulting from powerlessness in which the action becomes an almost extreme (suicide) means of coping with low self-esteem, a compensatory behavior type. Violation of fish and game laws can only be explained in subcultural values. In proposition V, running amuck, i s a special case which can occur in group I B , group I I or group I I I . I t can f i t under the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic Criteria (312, 34) Intermittent Explosive Disorder or a special condition where ego control i s lost because of chemical intervention, fear, pain, etc. This can be explained in the self-esteem model where i t i s due to low self-esteem or due to a special set of circumstances in the social milieu. Frequently theories develop within different disciplines independently and yet they tend to explain the same or similar phenomenon. Merton, a sociologist, was concerned with the problem of explaining social deviance in society. Adler, a psychiatrist, was concerned with

30

R.A.STEFFENHAGEN

helping people t o resolve t h e i r personal problems, yet i n r e a l i t y he was dealing with deviance (neurosis/psychosis) on the personal l e v e l . Adler was a humanist, and a s s o c i a l reformer he saw t h e r o l e society played i n creating personal problems. Therefore, h i s paradigm can successfully be integrated with the Mertonian paradigm t o more f u l l y explain deviance. This paper i s not meant t o be exhaustive but t o show the need for i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y work. REFERENCES

Downloaded by [University of Chicago] at 22:49 09 January 2013

Ansbacher, H. and R. Ansbacher 1956 The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler, New York: Harper Torch Books. Clinard, M.B. 1964 Anomie and Deviant Behavior, New York: The Free Press. James, W . 1890 Principles of Psychology, Vol. I , New York: Henry Holt. Merton, R.K. 1938 "Social Structure and Anomie.", American Sociological Review. 3:672-682, October. Short, J.F. 1964 "Gang Delinquency and Anomie", i n Anomie and Deviant Behavior, i n M. B. Clinard (ed.) New York: The Free Press.
Request reprints from R. A. Steffenhagen, Department of Sociology, 31 South Prospect Street, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen