INTERACTIONALIST & LABELLING THEORY Flashcards
What are LABELLIBG THEORISTS INTERESTED in/ believe
- INTERESTED in HOW and WHY CERTAIN ACTS Come to BE DEFINED or LABELLED AS CRIMINAL
- NO ACT is INHERENTLY CRIMINAL
- It’s NOT the NATURE of ACT that MAKES IT DEVIANT, but the NATURE of SOCIETY’S REACTION TO the ACT
What does BECKER believe about a DEVIANT
A DEVIANT is SOMEONE to WHOM the LABEL has BEEN Successfully APPLIED, and DEVIANT is BEHAVIOUR that PEOPLE so LABEL
BECKER - What are MORAL ENTREPRENEURS and What is Their ROLE?
are the PEOPLE who LEAD a MORAL ‘CRUSADE’ to CHANGE the LAW
Has 2 Effects :
- CREATION of NEW GROUP of ‘OUTSIDERS’ - those DEVIANTS who BREAK the NEW RULES
- CREATION or EXPANSION of a SOCIAL CONTROL AGENCY to ENFORCE the RULE and IMPOSE LABEL On OFFENDERS
e.g. PLATT (1969) - ‘Juvenile Delinquency’ was Created as a Result of a Campaign by Upper Class Victorian Moral Entreprenuers Aimed at Protecting the Young People at Risk
What does BECKER argue about SOCIAL CONTROL AGENCIES and an Example
= SCA’s CAMPAIGN for CHANGE In LAW to INCREASE Their OWN POWER
- e.g. MARIJUANA TAX ACT 1937 - Outlined Marijuana Use was Suposdely to Curb the ILL Effects on Young People, But BECKER Argued it was to Extend the Bureau’s Influence -> Wanted to Define Which Behaviour is Acceptable and This Wasn’t
What are FACTORS that AFFECT Whether A PERSON is ARRESTED, CHARGED and CONVICTED?
- INTERACTIONS With AGENCIES Of SOCIAL CONTROL
- APPEARANCE, BACKGROUND and PERSONAL BIOGRAPHY
- SITUATION and CIRCUMSTANCES Of the OFFENCE
Leads LABEELING THEORISTS to LOOK at HOW the LAWS are APPLIED and ENFORCED -> STUDIES SHOW AGENCIES of SOCIAL CONTROL Are MORE LIKELY to LABEL CERTAIN GROUPS of People As DEVINAT or CRIMINAL -> e.g. Young People
CICOUREL : The Negotiation of Justice , What did he argue about Stereotype?
- DECISIONS to ARREST are INFLUENCED By STEREOTYPES
- STEREOTYPE About What the TYPICAL DELINQUENT is Like LED Them to CONCENTRATE on CERTAIN TYPES -> CLASS BIAS - W/C Areas and PEOPLE are MORE LIKELY to FIT the TYPE -> LED to MORE PATROLS in These AREAS -> LEADS to MORE ARRESTS Which CONFIRMS and REINFORCES the STEREOTYPE
CICOUREL : The Negotiation of Justice , What did he argue about PROBABTION OFFICERS
- e.g. PO’s held COMMON SENSE THEORY that JUVENILE DELINQUENCY is CAUSED by BROKEN HOMES. Youths From Such Backgrounds are SEEN as MORE LIKELY to OFFEND in FUTURE and LESS LIKELY to SUPPORT NON-CUSTODIAL SEMTENCES
- JUSTICE ISN’T FIXED But NEGOTIABLE -> M/C are LESS LIKELY to Be CHARHED - DOESN’T FIT STEREOTYPE and PARENTS Able to NEGOTAITE SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES
What do INTERACTIONALISTS Think of CRIME STATS
- See Crime Stats as SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED
- LABELS ATTACHED to INDIVIUDALS SUSPECTS AFFECT the OUTCOMES
- ONLY TELL Us ABOUT The ACTIVITIES Of the POLICE and PROSECUTERS , NOT The CRIMME That Is OUT THERE OR WHO COMMITS It
- STATS ARE COUNTS of The DECISIONS MADE BY CONTROL AGENTS at ‘DECISION GATES’
How does LEMERT argue about DIFFERENCE between PRIMARY & SECONDARY DEVIANCE
PRIMARY - DEVIANT ACTS that HAVEN’T Been PUBLICALLY LABELLED
SECONDARY - the RESULT of SOCIATAL REACTION - LABELLING
- is POINTLESS to FIND the CAUSES of PRIMARY DEVIANCE as Is So WIDESPREAD and OTEN TRIVAL, Mostly gets Uncaught
- SECONDARY is RESULT of Being STIGMATISED, HUMILIATED or EXCLUDED From Normal SOCIETY
- Once LABELLED, INDIVUDALS May ONLY be SEEN IN Terms Of this LABEL -> Becomes Their MASTER STATUS
- CREATES CRISES For SELF-Concept or IDENTITY. If LABEL is ACCEPTED -> SFP -> ACTING Out LABEL -> SECONDARY DEVIANCE
What is the LINK Between SECONDARY DEVIANCE and DEVIANT CAREER
SD is LIKELY to PROVOKE FURTHER HOSTILE REACTIONS From SOCIETY and REINFORCE the DEVIANT’s ‘OUTSIDER’ STATUS -> May LEAD to MORE DEVIANCE and a DEVIANT CAREER -> May Involve JOINING a DEVIANT SUBCULTURE that OFFERS DEVIANT CAREER OPPORTUNITIES, REWARDS DEVIANT BEHAVIOUR and CONFIRMS His DEVAINT IDENTITY
What is the DEVIANCE AMPLIFICATION SPIRAL
- USED to DESCRIVE the PROCESS in Which the ATTEMPT to CONTROL DEVIANCE LEADS to an INCREASE in LEVEL of DEVIANCE -> this LEADS to GREATER EFFORTS To CONTROL It and In Turn PRODUCES HIGH LEVELS of DEVIANCE Still
- MORE CONTROL = MORE DEVIANCE In an ESACALTATING SPIRIAL
- LABELLING THERORIST have APPLIED this To MORAL PANICS of the ‘MODS & ROCKERS’
- SOCIETAL REACTION DOESN’T LEAD to SUCCESSFUL CONTROL BUT To FURTHER DEVIANCE which LEADS to FURTHER CONTROL etc.
HOW is the DEVIANCE AMPLIFICATION SPIRL ILLUSTATED
.
LABELLING and CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY
- INCREASES in ATTEMPT to CONTROL and PUNISH YOUNG OFFENDERS can HAVE the OPPOSITE EFFECT
- TRIPLEET (2000) - INCREASING TENDANCY to SEE YOUNG OFFENDERS as EVIL and to be LESS TOLERANT of MINOR DEVIANCE
- CJS LABELLED OFFENCES such as TRUANCY as MORE SERIOUS - HARSHER SENTENCES
- RESULTS in an INCREASE Rather than a DECREASE in OFENDING
BRAITHWAITE (1989) - REINTERGEATIVE SHAMING - Explain
- IDENTIFIES a POSITIVE ROLE of the LABELLING PROCESS
- 2 TYPES of SHAMING
- DISINTERGEATIVE SHAMING - the CRIME AND CRIMINAL is LABELED and the OFFENDER is EXCLUDED From SOCIETY
- REINTERGRATIE SHAMING - LABELS the ACT but NOT the ACTOR - have Done a Bad Thing But NOT a BAD PERSON
BRAITHWAITE (1989) - Explain How REINTERGATIVE SHAMING is POSITIVE od Labelling Process
- AVOIDS STIGMATISING the OFFENDER As EVIL WHILST MAKING Them AWARE Their ACT is NOT ACCEPTABLE and the NEGATIVE IMPACT IT HAS On SOCIETY , Encourages Forgiveness
- AVOIDS SECONDARY DEVIANCE
- CRIME RATES TEND to be LOWER in SOCIETIES Where REINTERGRATIVE SHAMING is a DOMINANT WAY of DEALING With OFFENDERS
