By Frances Fenton.

“The present study is an attempt to investigate the question, How and to what extent do newspaper presentations of crime and other anti-social activities influence the growth of crime and other types of anti-social activity? That is, do people get the idea of, or the impulse to, committing criminal and other anti-social acts from the reading of such acts or similar acts in the newspapers? It is not necessary at this point to define criminal acts any further than to say that, although they vary somewhat in different states and at diflfer- ent times, penal codes adequately define them as "an act or omission to act forbidden by law and punishable upon conviction." The expression, "other anti-social acts" refers to activities not technically criminal, but perhaps immoral in character, and detrimental to group life, which have not yet, and may never, become incorporated in penal codes.”

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1900. 96p.

By Graeme Newman.

This book represents the first systematic attempt to survey public perceptions of deviant behavior cross-culturally: in India. Indonesia. Iran Italy. Yugoslavia and the United States. While it was discovered that there was extensive diversity} in both law and perception concerning such deviances of taking drugs, homosexuality and abortion. yet evidence was found for a basically invariant structure in perception of deviance across all cultures. Within the countries that were studied, it was the strength of religious belief and urban rural background that accounted for major differences in the perception of deviance— when differences were identified. These findings challenge many of the assumptions of conflict theory in sociology, of cultural relativism in anthropology and of ethical relativism in moral philosophy. These, and other issues that are discussed will interest social scientists in many fields, especially anthropologists, sociologists of law, conflict theorists, criminologists, attitude theorists, moral philosophers, opinion pollsters, and labelling theorists.

NY. Elsevier. 1976. 320p.