labelling and control theories Flashcards
what is labelling theory in criminology?
labelling theory is a collection of perspectives rather than a single theory, suggesting that societal labels can influence individual behaviour and identity
what happens when someone is labeled as a criminal or deviant?
they may internalise that label, leading to further deviant behaviour and potentially becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy
what is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the context of labelling theory?
it’s the idea that if someone is labeled negatively, they may begin to act in ways that conform to that label, even if it wasn’t their original identity
how does labelling theory relate to societal reactions?
the theory emphasises that societal reactions and the stigma attached to labels can significantly impact an individual’s behaviour and identity
how is labelling theory similar to techniques of neutralisation?
both concepts help explain the complexities of crime and deviance, with labelling theory focusing on the impact of labels and techniques of neutralisation explaining how individuals rationalise their deviant behaviour
what do labelling perspectives suggest about formal reactions to crime?
they suggest that formal reactions can become a stepping-stone in the development of a criminal career and escalate antisocial behaviours
who are 3 key theorists associated with labelling perspectives?
- Becker
- Lemert
- Tannennbaum
what is the foundation of labelling perspectives built upon?
symbolic interactionism, as proposed by Blumer
what does symbolic interactionism posit?
that social meaning is generated through the repeated use of social actions, objects, and language
how do definitions ‘cause’ deviance?
they generate symbolic processes that lead individuals to be set aside as negatively categorised and undergo a transformation of status
what transformation can occur due to labelling?
individuals may be viewed as inferior or morally unfit, which can entrench them in a deviant identity
how is the definition of ‘deviant’ behaviour constructed under labelling perspectives?
it is socially constructed through a process of repeated interactions
who gives meaning to labels in the labelling perspective?
meaning is given to labels by both society and individuals themselves
what contributes to the internalisation of labels?
the repeat application and internalisation of these labels contribute to how individuals perceive themselves
what role do repeated interactions play in labelling perspectives?
they are essential in constructing the social meaning of deviant behaviour
what does the labelling perspective suggest about deviance?
it postulates that deviance is in the eyes of the beholders and that labelling someone as deviant can lead to negative consequences, such as giving a ‘dog a bad name
what is the central idea of labelling theory?
the central idea is that deviance is created by the social audience, its criteria of judgment, and the consequences of its judgment, which are the primary causes of deviance
how do theorists in labelling theory view deviance and deviants?
they require criminologists to think of deviance and deviants as social constructions that arise from a process of interaction.
what did this way of thinking lead to in terms of theory and analysis?
it led to the development of two related but separate areas of theory and analysis
what does the first area of labelling perspective explore?
it explores the importance of social reactions in shaping the behaviour of those who are labelled as deviant
what emphasis came with the focus on social reactions in labelling theory?
there was an emphasis on analytic methods that call for the discovery of meaning through qualitative methods
what does the second area of labelling theory address?
it addresses questions regarding the development of definitions of behaviours as deviant or criminal
what mechanisms are examined in relation to formal social control agencies?
it examines how agencies like the police decide who to process as criminal and thus label
which theoretical framework is associated with the labelling perspective?
symbolic interactionism
how does class relate to labelling perspectives?
class can never fully be removed from labelling perspectives, indicating that social class plays a significant role in the labelling process
what is the first point from Chambliss’ writing regarding criminal acts?
acts are considered criminal because it is in the interests of the ruling class to define them as such
what does the second point state about individuals labelled as criminal?
persons are labelled criminal because defining them in this way serves the interests of the ruling class
what does the third point explain about the labelling of different social classes?
the lower classes are labelled criminal while the bourgeoisie is not, due to the bourgeoisie’s control of the means of production, which gives them control over the State and law enforcement
what was the focus of Chambliss’ ethnographic study at ‘Hannibal High’?
Chambliss observed two groups of students to demonstrate how social class and societal labelling led to differing definitions of delinquency
how did the two groups of students differ in community perception despite similar behaviours?
each group engaged in the same amount of delinquency but received different reactions; one group was seen as normal teenagers while the other was labelled as delinquent
who are the ‘Saints’ in Chambliss’ study?
the ‘Saints’ are eight teenagers who engaged in the same delinquent behaviour as the ‘Roughnecks’ but came from middle-class homes, allowing them to evade the deviant label
who are the ‘Roughnecks’ and how were they perceived by the community?
the ‘Roughnecks’ are six teenagers from lower-class households who were viewed by the community as troublemakers
what types of delinquent activities did the ‘Saints’ engage in during Chambliss’ observation?
the ‘Saints’ participated in truancy, underage drinking, and other delinquencies nearly every day
were the delinquencies of the ‘Saints’ limited to harmless activities?
no, the delinquencies included dangerous acts, such as removing barricades around road construction sites and waiting for motorists to crash
what did Chambliss note about the consequences of the ‘Saints’ activities?
Chambliss found it surprising that no one was seriously injured as a result of the ‘Saints’ activities
how did the police respond to the ‘Saints’ delinquent behaviour?
the ‘Saints’ were stopped and confronted by police officers on several occasions, but they were not deterred from their activities
how did the labelling of the ‘Saints’ and ‘Roughnecks’ affect their futures?
the labelling shaped their futures while they were still in school, influencing perceptions and opportunities
what role did grades play in the treatment of the ‘Saints’ and ‘Roughnecks’?
the ‘Saints’ generally had higher grades, leading to a more favourable perception, while the ‘Roughnecks’ struggled academically, resulting in negative labels
how did visibility impact the treatment of the two groups?
the ‘Saints’ engaged in delinquent activities in less visible areas, avoiding detection, whereas the ‘Roughnecks’ were more visible in their misbehaviours, attracting scrutiny
what was the significance of demeanour in the treatment of the ‘Saints’ and ‘Roughnecks’?
the ‘Saints’ appeared more respectful and polite, gaining sympathy, while the ‘Roughnecks’ had a more aggressive demeanour, leading to harsher treatment
who is associated with an early type of labelling perspective in 1938?
Frank Tannenbaum
what did Tannenbaum observe about delinquency?
he was struck by the normalcy of much delinquency among adolescents
how did Tannenbaum view juvenile delinquency?
he noted that many forms of delinquency are part of adolescent street life, contributing to play, adventure, and excitement
what is the issue with how delinquent activities are perceived?
while some view these activities nostalgically as part of youth, others see them as a nuisance or threat, which can lead to police involvement
what does Tannenbaum suggest about police intervention?
police intervention can change how individuals and their behaviours are perceived by others and by themselves
how does Tannenbaum describe the shift in perception following police intervention?
there is a shift from defining specific acts as evil to a broader definition of the individual involved
why is the first contact with authorities significant, according to Tannenbaum?
it can initiate a ‘dramatisation of evil’ that separates the individual from peers and leads to specialised treatment
what concern does Tannenbaum express regarding the ‘dramatisation of evil’?
he worries that this process can contribute more to creating a criminal identity than any other experience, leading individuals to see themselves as delinquents
how does Tannenbaum view legal sanctions associated with police and courts?
he asserts that they create more problems than they solve, turning the conventional idea of deterrence on its head
what solution does Tannenbaum propose regarding the dramatisation of evil?
he argues that “The way out is through a refusal to dramatize the evil. The less said about it the better”
what does Tannenbaum suggest about the approach to deviance?
he suggests that the less said and done regarding deviant behaviour, the better
what concepts does Tannenbaum develop in relation to deviance?
he develops the concepts of primary deviance and secondary deviance
what is primary deviance according to Lemert?
primary deviance refers to the initial acts of deviance or criminality committed by an individual