Interactionist perspective Crime and deviance Flashcards
Interactionism
So far we have looked at theories which accept the ‘official’ definitions of crime and deviance
They also accept official crime figures as mostly accurate
Interactionism / labelling theory unlike functionalism looks at how and why some people / activities are labelled as criminal or deviant Therefore for interactionists crime and deviance is a social construct created through social interactions Less about ‘wider forces’ More about individual interactions Micro-approach
The social construction of crime
‘No act is criminal or deviant in of itself, it is the act of labelling which makes it so’
Howard Becker 1963 say :
“Social groups create deviance by creating the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders.”
For Becker and Interactionists a deviant is simply someone who has been labelled so
How do laws and rules get made?
Becker say ‘moral entrepreneurs’ begin a ‘crusade’ to see laws / rules introduced and policed in the belief it will benefit those to whom it is applied
These new laws / rules ultimately lead to creation of new outsiders / deviants and the empowering of a social control agency (E.g. police)
E.g. Juvenile delinquents were created by campaign by upper class Victorian moral entrepreneurs wanting to protect young people Established juvenile courts State extended powers into ‘status offences’ such as promiscuity and truancy
Becker say:
Social control agencies also like to campaign for changes in the law to gain more powers E.g. US Federal Bureau of Narcotics campaigned for the Marijuana Tax Act 1937 to ‘protect’ young people (but really to expand its sphere of influence) It is not the inherent harmfulness of a behaviour that leads to a new law It is the efforts of powerful individuals
Who gets labelled
Not everyone who commits an offence is labelled It depends on factors such as
- Previous interactions with social control agencies
- Their appearance Background Biography
- The situation / circumstances of the offence
Agencies of social control more likely to label certain groups Act on typifications
E.g. Police decisions to arrest youth are often based on physical appearance and where they are located ASBOs disproportionately applied to ethnic minorities
The negotiation of justice
Aaron Cicourel 1968 say :
Police have ‘typifications’ or stereotypes of criminals They police certain areas more than others M / c parents able to plead on child behalf W / c parents less likely to do this or be listened to
The effects of labelling
Arguably by labelling someone as deviant or criminal you increase the likelihood of such behaviour The self-fulfilling prophecy
Edwin Lemert 1951 :
Identified two types of deviance
Primary deviance - Acts not publicly labelled Often go unnoticed Widespread and meaningless Carried out by lots of people E.g. fare dodging ‘A moment of madness’ People do not self-identify as deviant
But some deviance is noticed and labelled by society Being caught leads to shame and humiliation Once an individual is labelled as deviant it becomes a ‘master status’ or overriding identity E.g. Thief Junkie Paedophile Leads to self-identification as deviant This can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy
This is Lemert secondary deviance - Acting out a label (outsider) Provokes a hostile reaction from society Could lead to a deviant career Could lead to joining a deviant subculture
The work of Lemert and Young shows it is not the act in itself But the hostile reaction Which causes deviance
Social control agencies actually cause deviance in this fashion Despite seeking to uphold law-abiding behaviour
BUT labelling is not inevitable There is a role of free choice / will Many reject their label or may not even realise they have been labelled
Deviance amplification
Stanley Cohen 1972 Deviance amplification spiral :
The deviance amplification spiral is a term used to describe a process in which the attempt to control deviance leads to an increase in the level of deviance
This leads to greater attempts to control it And in turn this produces yet higher levels of deviance
More and more control produces more and more deviance In an escalating spiral or snowballing feedback process
E.g. Mods and rockers - A moral panic which received press exaggeration Lead to a growing concern with moral entrepreneurs calling for a ‘crackdown’ The police responded by arresting more youths and imposing higher penalties This seemed to confirm the truth of the original media reaction Provoking more public concern Leading to an upward spiral of deviance amplification At the same time the demonisation of mods and rockers as ‘folk devils’ caused further marginalisation Resulting in more deviant behaviour on their part
Deviant act –> Crime - as defined by crime control agencies –> Operation of news values - selective practices of news-making –> Crime as news - selective portrayal of crime in the media –> Deviancy amplification - targeting of news, public concern and crime control agencies on particular aspects of deviance perceived and real increases in deviance –> Moral panic - law and order campaign –> Public definition of crime - consequences of selective knowledge about crime fear less tolerance calls for crackdowns Etc. –> Repeats
