Labeling theory - Wikipedia
Assess the relationship between deviance and labelling. (12 Marks). According to labelling theorists such as Becker, there is no particular quality to an act which . All of this has led labelling theorists to look at how and why rules and From this point of view, deviance is produced by a process of interaction between . Cicourel argued that this difference can only be accounted for by the. Labeling theory is the theory of how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. It is associated with the concepts of self-fulfilling prophecy and stereotyping. Labeling theory holds that deviance is not inherent to an act, but instead A stigma is defined as a powerfully negative label that.
Basically the public, the police and the courts selectively label the already marginalised as deviant, which the then labelled deviant responds to by being more deviant. Becker argues that there are 5 stages in this process: The Individual is publicly labelled as a deviant, which may lead to rejection from several social groups. For example, if someone is labelled a junkie they may be rejected by their family. This may encourage further deviance. For example, drug addicts may turn to crime to finance their habit.
Examine the Relationship Between Deviance and Labeling Essay Sample
The official treatment of deviance may have similar effects. EG convicted criminals find it difficult to find jobs. A deviant career may emerge.
The deviant career is completed when individuals join an organised deviant group. This is the stage when an individual confirms and accepts their deviant identity. This is the stage at which the label may become a master status, overriding all other forms of relationship outside the deviant group.
Labelling Theory Applied to Education Labelling theory has been applied to the context of the school to explain differences in educational achievement this should sound familiar from year 1! This pupil speaks in elaborated speech code, is polite, and smartly dressed, He argued that middle class teachers are likely view middle class pupils more positively than working class pupils irrespective of their intelligence. Thus teachers positively label the students most like them. There is also evidence of a similar process happening with African Caribbean children.
Sociologists such as David Gilborn argue that teachers hold negative stereotypes of young black boys, believing them to be more threatening and aggressive than White and Asian children.
The Labelling Theory of Crime ~ ReviseSociologyReviseSociology
They are thus more likely to interpret minor rule breaking by black children in a more serious manner than when White and Asian children break minor rules. Rosenthal and Jacobsen argued that positive teacher labelling can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the student believes the label given to them and the label becomes true in practise. However, this list was actually just a random selection of student names Stage three —One year later those students who teachers believed to be the most intelligent had improved the most.
In order for a moral panic to break out, the public need to believe what they see in the media, and respond disproportionately, which could be expressed in heightened levels of concern in opinion polls or pressure groups springing up that campaign for action against the deviants.
Cohen showed how the media, for lack of other stories exaggerated the violence which sometimes took place between them. The effect of the media coverage was to make the young people categorise themselves as either mods or rockers which actually helped to create the violence that took place between them,which further helped to confirm them as violent in the eyes of the general public. An example of an Interactionist inspired policy would be the decriminalisation of drugs.
According to Interactionist theory, decriminalisation should reduce the number of people with criminal convictions and hence the risk of secondary deviance, an argument which might make particular sense for many drugs offences because these are often linked to addiction, which may be more effectively treated medically rather than criminally.
Reintegrative Shaming Most interactionist theory focuses on the negative consequences of labelling, but John Braithwaite identifies a more positive role for the labelling process.
Examine the Relationship Between Deviance and Labeling | Essay Example
He distinguishes between two types of shaming: Disintegrative shaming where not only the crime, but also the criminal, is labelled as bad and the offender is excluded from society. These theorists shaped their argument around the notion that, even though some criminological efforts to reduce crime are meant to help the offender such as rehabilitation effortsthey may move offenders closer to lives of crime because of the label they assign the individuals engaging in the behavior.
As members in society begin to treat these individuals on the basis of their labels, the individual begins to accept this label him- or herself. In other words, an individual engages in a behavior that is deemed by others as inappropriate, others label that person to be deviant, and eventually the individual internalizes and accepts this label.
- Labeling theory
This notion of social reaction, reaction or response by others to the behavior or individual, is central to labeling theory. Falsely accused represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behavior but have been perceived as deviant; therefore, they would be falsely labeled as deviant. Conforming represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behavior that has been viewed as obedient behavior not been perceived as deviant. Pure deviant represents those individuals who have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behavior that has been recognized as such; therefore, they would be labeled as deviant by society.
Secret deviant represents those individuals that have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behavior but have not been perceived as deviant by society; therefore, they have not been labeled as deviant. Erikson, deviance is functional to society and keeps stability by defining boundaries. InErikson expanded labeling theory to include the functions of deviance, illustrating how societal reactions to deviance stigmatize the offender and separate him or her from the rest of society.
The results of this stigmatization is a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the offender comes to view him- or herself in the same ways society does. Speeding would be a good example of an act that is technically criminal but does not result in labeling as such.
Furthermore, many would view recreational marijuana use as another example. This pathway from primary deviance to secondary deviance is illustrated as follows: This theory essentially posits that reintegrative shaming will reduce crime, unlike stigmatization, which, according to labeling theory, essentially increases it by encouraging future deviance.
The argument driving this theory is the notion that reintegrative shaming demonstrates that a behavior is wrong without hurting the individual accused of that behavior. Rather, society encourages the individual to make up for what he or she has done, show remorse for the choice of behavior, and learn from the mistake. Under this theory, society teaches its members and then readily accepts them back into the group without permanent labels or stigmas attached. Heimer and Matsueda expanded this notion to include the term differential social control, which emphasizes that social control through role taking can take a conventional direction or a criminal direction because the acceptable courses of actions by peers may not necessarily be conventional or nondeviant courses of action.