interactionism explanations of crime

Question 1

key areas

Answer 1

1. Social constructionism and selective law enforcement
2. Primary and Secondary Deviance
3. Labelling and societal reaction
4. Deviancy amplification and the impact of the media
5. Labelling and the Criminal Justice Policy

Question 2

Social constructionism and selective law enforcement

Answer 2

• no difference between criminals and non-criminals
• everyone commits deviant acts and only some are caught and stigmatised
• we should focus on the reaction to deviance rather than the cause of the act

Becker

• interactionists focus on the reaction of the act rather than the act itself
• deviancy label is in the hands of the ‘audience’ witnessing the behaviour e.g public nudity or a nudist beach
• deviancy is just someone with a deviant label applied to them

Becker

• ‘moral entrepreneurs’ go on ‘moral crusades’ to change laws
• law creation has the two effect

1. changes or introduction of new laws leads to a new group of ‘outsiders’ (those who will break the law)
2. the creation or expansion of social control agents to enforce rules and impose labels on offenders

3 factors to determine if you are labelled

1. interactions with the police and courts
2. Their appearance, background and personal biography
3. The situation and circumstances of the offence

Pilivian and Briar
- police decisions amongst the youth were based on physical cues, ethnicity, gender - to judge their character

Phenomenologist, Circourel
- police decisions are influenced by stereotypes
- ‘typification’ officer common sense of what a delinquent looks like
- The CSEW revealed young Black men were x9 more likely to be stopped and searched than any other groups

Question 3

Primary and Secondary Deviance

Answer 3

Lemert

• primary deviance is deviance not publicly defined as so
• secondary deviance is deviance that gets a public reaction and can lead to rule enforcement (public labelling)

Primary and secondary deviance

Costal Inuits in Canada
- stuttering ‘caused’ by great importance attached to ceremonial speech-making

• failure = humiliation = anxiety = chronic stuttering

Question 4

Labelling and societal reaction

Answer 4

Malinoksi’s findings

• reactions of other defines an act as deviant
• trioband islanders study found incest to be common and acceptable if kept quite
• thus it is not the act itself but where the act occurs that leads to labels and stigmas

Becker’s labelling theory - (using Malinoksi’s findings)

1. just because someone breaks a rule doesn’t mean others will define it as deviant
2. Someone has to enforce the rule or draw attention to it.
3. If the person is successfully labelled then consequences follow - deviant has limited choices

Kitsuse

• rejects concept of uniformed response to labelling as a deviant
• 75 interviews with heterosexual students, wanted to see if responses to sexual advances were the same
• results: no agreed definition of what constitutes as a homosexual advance, its open to negotiation

Question 5

Labelling and societal reaction eval

Answer 5

Akers - criticised the view that deviants are like everyone else until they become labelled

• there must be a reason why labels are applied to some groups and not others.

Question 6

Labelling and societal reaction - labelling process

Answer 6

commonly believed values (of US in 1937 regarding outlaw of cannabis)

1. people ought to be in control of their actions and decisions
2. Please for its own sake was wrong
3. drugs are seen as addictive and ‘enslave’ people.

3 stages of labelling

1. moral crusade - moral entreupeners seek to outlaw certain behaviour
2. Responses - public response can be to accept or reject the ‘crusade’

2.5 labelling group has the power to impose a label

3. if a group is successfully labelled, then their behaviour and sense of identity changes (master status)

2 effects of labelling

1. Master status - defines an individual and overides other qualities
2. Self -fulfilling prophecy - sense of ‘self’ is derived from reactions of others so will change the way a person views themselves.

5 stages of labelling to leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy

1. publicly labelled deviant leading to rejection
2. encourages further deviance e.g drugs and crime to maintain addiction
3. official treatment of deviance may have similar effects (e.g asylum study)
4. joining an organisation of deviants is the final step in their ‘career’
5. within a group, a deviant subculture forms rationalising group behaviour

Question 7

Labelling and societal reaction - labelling process evaluations

Answer 7

positive

• provides an insight into of deviance not provided by structural theories
• it challenges the idea that deviants ARE different from normal people
• it shows how the deviant label can affect the self- concept of the deviant

negative

Marxist, Gouldner - argues Labelling theory fails to provide a real challenge to the status quo.
- fails to look forward in terms of who are the most powerful groups and what do they gain from this - drives attention from the real crime of corporate

Akers - Akers - criticised the view that deviants are like everyone else until they become labelled
- there must be a reason why labels are applied to some groups and not others.

Liazos - Criticizes labelling theorists for simply exploring marginally deviant activities as, by doing so, they are reinforcing the idea of pimps, prostitutes and mentally ill people as being deviant

Question 8

Deviancy amplification and the impact of the media

Answer 8

Wilkins - attempt to control deviance leads to an increase in the level of deviance as ‘deviance amplification’ as the cycle progresses.
more control = more crime - ‘deviancy amplification spiral’

Concept of deviancy amplification is applied to e.g Stan Cohen’s folk devils
- societal reactions to mods and rockers and sea side resort disturbances led to press exaggeration and moral panic = huge disciplinary measures by police e.g arrests —> seen as folk devils and marginalised

Fold devils are the opposite to the dark figure of crime - they are ‘over-labelled’ and over exposed through the media leading to Police focus on these groups rather than the ones contributing to the Dark Figure…

levels

McRobbie and Thornton - argue moral panics is an outdated concept, especially with the growth of sophisticated and educated audiences - reason for outdated is

1. Frequency - they occur too often and no longer ‘rare’
2. context - moral panics tended to scapegoat a particular group or individual but society todays is so fragmented there is no-one to ‘pin the blame;
3. Reflexivity - the concept is so well known, many groups try to create one for their own gain

Question 9

Labelling and the Criminal Justice Policy

Answer 9

Triplett - attempts to control and punish young offenders has the opposite effect.
- in America there has been a growing number who see young people as evil so police are less tolerant to minor offences = increase deviance

negative police labelling pushes impressionable young people into deviant careers, therefore there should be less rules to break - e.g in Holland soft drugs are legalised

Braithwaite - labelling can have a positive role e.g Disintegrative Shaming and Reintegrative shaming

Disintegrative shaming and Reintegrative shaming

Disintegrative Shaming - where the crime and the criminal is labelled as ‘bad’ and th offender is excluded from society e.g murderer

Reintegrative shaming - act is labelled but the actor is not e.g ‘he has done a bad thing’ rather than ‘he is a bad person’ - it was.a mistake
- encourage the communities forgiveness and separate the offender from the offence
- leads to lower crime rates.