Final answer:
The differential association reinforcement theory is limited by its lack of practical application to family behavior, not being based on comprehensive research, and its focus on individual rather than cultural contexts. It also overlooks cognitive processes and can be difficult to verify experimentally.
Step-by-step explanation:
Limitations of Differential Association Reinforcement Theory
Edwin Sutherland's differential association reinforcement theory has contributed significantly to criminology by suggesting that individuals learn deviant behavior through social interactions. However, there are notable limitations to this theory. One limitation is that the theory does not serve a practical purpose for studying family behavior, implying it may not address the complexities of family dynamics and their influence on deviant behavior. Another criticism is that the theory is not based on comprehensive research, which can impact its validity and reliability. Furthermore, the theory sometimes fails to account for broader cultural contexts, focusing narrowly on the behavior of individuals rather than considering larger social structures.
Moreover, sociologist Albert Bandura's work on social learning theory highlights cognitive processes in learning, which are not as emphasized in Sutherland's theory. This illustrates another limitation: the potential oversight of internal mental states in learning deviance. Additionally, the applicability of differential association theory can be time consuming and challenging, as the model cannot be easily experimentally verified, and measuring the relevant variables can be problematic.