Course Home

Questions for:

Weisburd, D., Wheeler, S., Waring, E., & Bode, N. (1991). Crimes of the Middle Classes: White-Collar Offenders in the Federal Courts. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Chapter 1

1. What are the implications if “white collar crime [WCC] is a social rather than a legal concept?”
2. At the time of his original writings (1930s, 1040s), in what ways did white collar crime present “challenges” to the dominant “criminological theories of his day”?
3. For Sutherland, what were the “distinguishing qualities of white collar crime”?
4. By the early 1970s, how was the study of white collar crime different in form from its earlier incarnation?
5. In your opinion, what are the strengths and weaknesses of Edelhertz’s definition of WCC? How did it change scholarship?
6. How did views about WCC shift in the 1980s?
7. What operational definition did the researchers use for white collar offenders? [Bear in mind this was the 1970s….] Do you think any major category of white collar offending was left out?
8. Researchers ask about the relationship between different types of WCCs: unitary, different categories, or spread out along a continuum of “white collarness.” Can you explain what the important theoretical and policy implications would be of findings supporting one conception vs. another?
9. [You also will want to come back to this question after reviewing their results and decide which view their findings support, and why, and indicate whether you think their conclusion is correct or incorrect and why. IMPORTANT]
10. In what way is the researchers’ approach a “middle path”?
11. The criminals in the “common crimes” comparison group had committed what crimes?
12. What do you think about their leaving out corporations? Was this a significant omission? Why or why not? Do you think this selection decision influenced what they found?

Chapter 2

13. Be sure you understand the basics of each of the 8 types of crimes examined here.
14. Be sure you can describe each of the two dimensions they are going to use to organize these various crimes: organizational complexity (OC) and harm or impact.
15. Do the 8 types vary in degree of OC? What are the implications of this?
16. Do they vary in harm? Implications?
17. Can you explain how the researchers combine these two attributes to create a “four level hierarchy of white-collar offenses?”
18. What are the implications of this hierarchy?
19. Are WCCs different from common crimes, as the researchers define the latter?
20. The researchers suggest that the bulk of WCCs, in contrast to the popular vision, have what central character?

Chapter 3

21. What categories do the perps fit into?
22. How to the offense classes and the offender classes fit together? What are the implications of this?
23. How do the researchers distinguish between social status or SES (socioeconomic status) and social class (within the organization)? How are the implications of each different?
24. How is SES distributed across the different groups of offenders?
25. For what group is WCC part of a broader criminal career? What are the implications of this?
26. For the most consequential WCCs, which is more important – position within the organization of organization status – and why?
27. Describe in your own words the mediating model the researchers evolve to connect the SES of individuals to potential for WCCs with a lot of harm.
28. On what basis do the researchers argue that the white collar criminals are “average Americans.” Be specific about the differences. Do you think their evidence supports this view? IMPORTANT.

Chapter 4

29. How do they operationalize extent of victimization or impact? Reactions?
30. What do they mean by organizational complexity of the crime? How do they operationalize it? Can you explain how it creates an advantage?
31. In table 4.2, what factors have the biggest impacts on degree of harm (victimization) and what interpretation do the researchers give to these impacts?[1] IMPORTANT.
32. In what ways do they think race and gender are connecting with structural position?
33. What do they find when they try and predict the organizational complexity of the crime (Table 4.2)? What has the biggest impacts? Why? What is going on with social status? (Figure 4.1). How do they interpret this?[2] Your reactions?
34. How do the age impacts work in their theoretical mediating model?
35. On p. 93 they say “organizational space” is central and this “demands rethinking” some fundamentals about WCC. You want to be able to see clearly the steps that led them to this conclusion, decide if you agree with the steps in their reasoning, and whether the evidence is sufficient for this conclusion, and whether you agree with their implications.
36. What DOES it mean if organizational complexity rather than social status is the most key?

Chapter 5 (to 99)

37. What are the paths to discovery of WCCs? How different from common crimes? Does the path link to the WCC type?
38. Do you think these paths and the associated discovery lag have implications for perceptions of seriousness of these crimes?

CONCLUSION – not required reading, but if you do read it then think about this.

39. How do they connect large scale structural changes in the U.S. occupational structure with the differences between their views about white collar criminals and Sutherland’s views?
40. The researchers discuss ongoing changes in the structure of the US work force and economy and technologies, and possible implications for WCC and who can be a white-collar criminal. What do they foresee, and why, and do you agree or disagree with them, and why?

SOME BROADER QUESTIONS TO THINK ABOUT AND PERHAPS WRITE ABOUT

41. Discuss the degree to which the theoretical model developed by Weisburd et al., and empirically supported is basically a) an opportunity based model b) emphasizing the rationality of offending.
42. Describe the connection between white-collar offending and financial need as revealed in Weisburd et al.’s research. Is this similar to or different from the financial need for street criminals like robbers and burglars?
43. Are white collar criminals specialized offenders or general offenders? What evidence is presented about this?