This article discusses the broad ideological differences between psychiatric and sociopathic explanations of criminal behavior, including origins, theoretical, and methodological issues. Between 1936 and 1950, the major criticisms of psychiatric explanations of crime came from proponents of one theoretical perspective, differential association. This theory is believed by some criminologists to be superior to two traditionally held psychiatric approaches to explaining criminal behavior. The psychiatric theorists believe that criminal behavior is the result of an imbalance of the key components of the human personality, namely the id, ego, and superego. The second psychiatric approach views crime as emerging from problems incurred during an individual's personality development. Opponents of the psychiatric explanation believe that people will commit crime when they come into contact with a higher ratio of 'definitions favorable to violation of law' than 'definitions unfavorable to violation of law.' Differential association focuses on the importance of group conflict in the creation of laws and subsequent definitions of criminal behavior. Proponents argue that when a society is composed of conflicting groups, there may be great variation in their acceptance of noncriminal definitions of behavior. Those who reject prescribed definitions undoubtedly will engage in behavior considered to be criminal by members of influential groups. Some of the strongest arguments against psychiatric explanations of crime hold that: (1) the assumption of hidden variables such as 'moral weakness' are the source of criminal behavior, (2) moral judgments rather than scientific reasoning exemplify psychiatric research, (3) childhood socialization practices are overemphasized, (4) these explanations are circular in their logic and explanations, and (5) biased samples are used. 37 references.