what is a major criticism of social disorganization theory
Social disorganization theory Robert J. Bursik Jr’s scholarly works played an important role in the revival of Social Disorganization Theory following its fall in popularity during the 1960s.[3] One of the main criticisms of Shaw and McKay’s theory was that it suggested, in certain area’s delinquency rates remained high regardless of the ethnicity group that lived there.[4] Researchers during this period felt that it was unlikely that crime patterns remained stable even though there were constant changes in population without these areas. Bursik’s work helped negate some of the criticisms associated with Shaw and McKay’s work; Bursik showed that it was possible and likely to have stable crime patterns within an area that showed constant population change. Specifically Bursik points out that “development of primary relationships that result in informal structures of social control is less likely when local networks are in continual state of flux.”[5] In the example of Chicago, as immigrants continue to come in, the population already there leave soon as it’s financially feasible, which in return makes it difficult for any stable form of social control to take place.
Symbolic interactionism Symbolic Interactionism comes from a sociological perspective which developed around the middle of the twentieth century and that continues to be influential in some areas of the discipline. It is particularly important in microsociology and social psychology. It is derived from the American philosophy of pragmatism and particularly from the work of George Herbert Mead, as a pragmatic method to interpret social interactions.[3]