How do right and left realism explain crime, and what do they propose to do about it?
Component 3 Section B (Crime and deviance): right realism (rational choice theory, Wilson and Kelling's broken windows, control theory) and left realism (Lea and Young on relative deprivation, marginalisation and subculture), and their contrasting solutions, with criticisms.
An Eduqas A-Level Sociology Crime and deviance guide to realist theories. Covers right realism (rational choice, Wilson and Kelling's broken windows, control theory and zero tolerance) and left realism (Lea and Young on relative deprivation, marginalisation and subculture, and the square of crime), their contrasting solutions and the criticisms of each.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
This statement covers the realist theories of crime, which emerged in the 1980s and take crime and its victims seriously: right realism (rational choice, Wilson and Kelling's broken windows, control theory) and left realism (Lea and Young on relative deprivation, marginalisation and subculture), and their contrasting solutions. The skill is to contrast their causes and policies and to evaluate both.
The answer
Right realism
Its main strands are:
- Rational choice theory: offenders weigh the costs and benefits of crime and offend when the rewards outweigh the risks. Crime can therefore be reduced by raising the risks (more policing, harsher penalties, target hardening).
- Wilson and Kelling's broken windows: visible disorder (broken windows, graffiti, litter) signals that nobody cares, inviting more crime. The remedy is to tackle disorder early through zero-tolerance policing.
- Control theory (Hirschi): people offend when their social bonds (attachment, commitment, involvement, belief) are weak, so strengthening bonds and control reduces crime.
The right-realist solutions are tougher policing, target hardening, and rebuilding order and personal responsibility.
Left realism
Left realists explain crime through three linked causes:
- Relative deprivation: people feel deprived compared with others, even if not absolutely poor, fuelling resentment and crime in a consumer society.
- Marginalisation: groups with no organised voice or stake in society (such as unemployed youth) lack legitimate channels for their frustration.
- Subculture: groups develop collective responses to their deprivation, some of which involve crime.
Their solutions target inequality and community-police relations, captured in the square of crime (the interplay of the offender, the victim, the state and the public). They favour democratic, accountable policing and tackling the roots of deprivation.
Criticisms
Right realism is criticised for ignoring structural causes (poverty, inequality) and the crimes of the powerful (corporate crime), for treating offenders as purely rational, and for justifying aggressive, discriminatory policing. Left realism is criticised for over-relying on victim surveys, for underplaying the crimes of the powerful, and for focusing on high-crime inner-city areas at the expense of a fuller picture.
Examples in context
A strong answer contrasts the two realisms on causes (choice and control versus deprivation and marginalisation) and solutions (tougher policing versus tackling inequality), and evaluates both.
Try this
Q1. Explain what left realists mean by 'relative deprivation'. [6 marks]
- What the marker wants. A definition (AO1): relative deprivation is the feeling of being deprived compared with others (rather than being absolutely poor), which in a consumer society can fuel resentment and crime (Lea and Young), with an example.
Q2. Analyse two differences between right and left realist solutions to crime. [12 marks]
- Cue. Two developed points: right realism favours tougher policing, target hardening and zero tolerance (raising the costs of crime), while left realism favours tackling inequality and improving democratic, accountable community-police relations, each explained and linked to their different views of the causes of crime.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of WJEC Eduqas exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
Eduqas A200 20196 marksExplain what Wilson and Kelling meant by 'broken windows'. [6]Show worked answer →
A short Section B knowledge question (AO1 with application). Define and develop.
Definition. The broken windows thesis (right realism) argues that visible signs of disorder, such as broken windows, graffiti and litter, signal that nobody cares, which invites more crime.
Development. The solution is to tackle disorder early through zero-tolerance policing, repairing the environment and enforcing order to prevent escalation. Naming zero tolerance as the policy implication secures the marks.
Eduqas A200 202120 marksEvaluate right and left realist explanations of crime. [20]Show worked answer →
A Section B essay (AO1, AO2 and AO3), shown at the 20-mark cap (worth more in the full paper), marked by levels of response.
For. Both take crime and its victims seriously: right realism (rational choice, broken windows, control theory) offers practical crime-prevention; left realism (relative deprivation, marginalisation, subculture) explains crime while taking working-class victimisation seriously.
Against. Right realism ignores structural causes and corporate crime and can justify aggressive policing; left realism is criticised for over-relying on victim surveys and underplaying the powerful.
Judgement. Realism usefully focuses on practical solutions and victims, but right realism neglects structure and left realism the powerful, so each captures only part of the picture. A balanced judgement reaches the top band.
Related dot points
- Component 3 Section B (Crime and deviance): defining crime and deviance, and the measurement of crime through official statistics, victim surveys and self-report studies, including the dark figure of crime and the social construction of crime statistics.
An Eduqas A-Level Sociology Crime and deviance guide to measuring crime. Covers definitions of crime and deviance, official statistics, the Crime Survey for England and Wales, self-report studies, the dark figure of crime, and the interpretivist view that crime statistics are socially constructed, with the exam skills Section B rewards.
- Component 3 Section B (Crime and deviance): functionalist theories of crime (Durkheim on the functions of crime and anomie, Merton's strain theory) and subcultural theories (Cohen's status frustration, Cloward and Ohlin's three subcultures), with their criticisms.
An Eduqas A-Level Sociology Crime and deviance guide to functionalist and subcultural theories. Covers Durkheim on the functions of crime and anomie, Merton's strain theory and its adaptations, Cohen's status frustration, Cloward and Ohlin's three subcultures, and the criticisms of these consensus structural theories.
- Component 3 Section B (Crime and deviance): interactionist labelling theory (Becker, Lemert, Cicourel, the self-fulfilling prophecy and deviancy amplification) and Marxist and critical theories of crime (selective law enforcement, the crimes of the powerful, ideology), with their criticisms.
An Eduqas A-Level Sociology Crime and deviance guide to labelling and Marxist theories. Covers interactionist labelling (Becker's master status and outsiders, Lemert's primary and secondary deviance, Cicourel, deviancy amplification) and Marxist and critical criminology (selective law enforcement, the crimes of the powerful, ideology), with criticisms.
- Component 3 Section B (Crime and deviance): gender and crime (the gender gap, Heidensohn's control theory, the chivalry thesis, Carlen, the link between masculinity and crime) and ethnicity and crime (patterns, the role of policing and the criminal justice system, and explanations), with criticisms.
An Eduqas A-Level Sociology Crime and deviance guide to gender and ethnicity. Covers the gender gap in offending, Heidensohn's control theory, the chivalry thesis, Carlen's class and gender deal, masculinity and crime (Messerschmidt), and the patterns and explanations of ethnicity and crime including the role of policing and the criminal justice system.
- Component 3 Section B (Crime and deviance): globalisation and crime (global criminal networks, transnational crime), green crime and state crime, and the relationship between the media and crime (moral panics, fear of crime, the media as a cause of crime), with criticisms.
An Eduqas A-Level Sociology Crime and deviance guide to contemporary themes. Covers globalisation and crime (transnational organised crime, the global criminal economy), green crime and state crime, and the media and crime (moral panics and folk devils, fear of crime, the media as a cause of crime, cybercrime), with criticisms.
Sources & how we know this
- Eduqas A Level Sociology Specification (A200) — Eduqas (2015)