Labelling theory

Question 1

4 key concepts

Answer 1

1. Not everyone who is deviant gets labelled as such
2. Crime is socially constructed
3. Labelling has real consequences
4. Labelling theory has a clear value position

Question 2

Interactionist approach

Answer 2

crime is the product of micro-level interactions between individuals and the police rather than the result of external social forces such as socialisation or blocked opportunity structures.

Question 3

Crime is socially constructed

Answer 3

There is no such thing as an inherently deviant act - it becomes deviant in circumstances where people label them as such.

Becker = draws on Malinowski’s study of ‘the outsiders’ to argue that an act is not deviant until it is labelled as such.

Question 4

Crime is socially constructed Becker

Answer 4

• An act is not deviant until it is labelled as such
• Draws from Malinowsi’s study of ‘The Outsiders’
• ‘The Outsiders’ - Malinowski completed a study of some villagers on an island where a youth killed himself after being publicly accused of incest. He discovered that incest was not uncommon on the island but it was looked down upon and the islanders reacted with abuse and offenders were ostracised and often driven to suicide. - the act was not deviant / he was not punished until the other islanders decided it was.

Question 5

Labelling has real consequences

Answer 5

• Young -Marijuana users at Notting Hill (1960s) = It can result in a SFP - Police began to target a group of hippies at Notting Hill and labelled them as deviant due to their marijuana useage. - as a response, a deviant subculture formed where casual marijuana use becam more frequent and more deviant - this shows that simply being labelled as deviant can make someone internalise the label and result in an SFP.
• Becker = It can result in a master status & Deviant career - a deviant/criminal label overrides all other labels for an individual and becomes their MS - results in them becoming ostracised by society/family/friends and unable to secure a job - therefore they have to take on a deviant career in order to live - results in re offending and a perpetual cycle
• Cohen - Mods & Rockers = Labelling can kick start a moral panic - when the media report on deviancy they create a narrative that features a clear villain (the folk devil) - members of society fear the folk devils and create a moral panic - in his study where the violent youth subcultures (mods & rockers)
• Wilkins - Deviancy amplification spiral = The repeated cycle of deviancy is a result of the moral panic advertising it - if there is more focus on a particular group or type of crime then police and media pay more attention to it which leads to increased prosecutions and media attention which feeds the moral panic.
• Lemert - Labelling can lead to secondary deviance = Primary deviance = when one acts in an isolated deviant way - the societal reaction to that (Labelling) could lead to secondary deviance - if a person os labelled as deviant they then internalise this label and subsequent deviant acts are secondary deviance.

Question 6

Labelling has real consequences - Key thinkers

Answer 6

• Young - Marijuana users at Notting Hill = Labelling can result in a SFP
• Becker = Labelling can result in a master status and deviant career
• Cohen - Mods & Rockers / Folk devils = Labelling can kick start a moral panic
• Wilkins - Deviancy amplification spiral = moral panics generate a repeated cycle of crime
• Lemert = labelling can lead to secondary deviance via internalising a label

Question 7

Not everyone who is deviant gets labelled as such

Answer 7

• Whether an actor is labelled as deviant or not depends on their:
• interactions with police
• Background
• Appearance (compared to the stereotypical criminal)
• Circumstances of the offence
• Negative labels are given to the powerless by the powerful - there is nobody to label the powerful - they do not get labelled as deviant

Cicourel - Power & the negotiation of justice = being labelled as deviant occurs in stages:

1. W/C youths = more likely to be stopped by police & labelled as deviant as they fit the typifications of the typical delinquent (EG talking back to authority, speaking in slang/restricted speech codes, poor education etc)
2. W/C are more likely to be prosecuted by courts - most of this is based on appearance & language and the labels associated with these characteristics rather than the deviant act

• M/C parents are better able to negotiate and cooperate with the police - less likely to be charcged - M/C parents can negotiate on their child’s behalf
• M/C are more likely to be labelled as ill after committing a crime whereas the W/C are labelled as criminal
• This explains the over exposure of W/C in crime statistics.

Question 8

Not everyone who is deviant gets labelled as such - Cicourel (power and the negotiation of justice )

Answer 8

being labelled as deviant occurs in stages:

1. W/C youths = more likely to be stopped by police & labelled as deviant as they fit the typifications of the typical delinquent (EG talking back to authority, speaking in slang/restricted speech codes, poor education etc)
2. W/C are more likely to be prosecuted by courts - most of this is based on appearance & language and the labels associated with these characteristics rather than the deviant act

• M/C parents are better able to negotiate and cooperate with the police - less likely to be charcged - M/C parents can negotiate on their child’s behalf
• M/C are more likely to be labelled as ill after committing a crime whereas the W/C are labelled as criminal
• This explains the over exposure of W/C in crime statistics.

Question 9

Labelling theory has a clear value position

Answer 9

• Labelling thoery should promote policies that prevent labelling minor acts as deviant

Braithwaite = 2 forms of shaming (reacition to deviancy that causes shame in the perpetrator)

1. Disintegrative shaming - has a stigmatized effect and excludes a person from the community. it provides for the emergence of secondary deviance. EG naming and shaming policies found in the USA.
2. Reintegrative Shaming - Labels the act as deviant instead of the individual. Allowing for that individual to eventually reintegrate into society successfully and without increasing the risk of re offending.

Question 10

Positive Evaluations of labelling theory

Answer 10

• Recognises that the law is not ‘set in stone’ and actively changes over time.
• Understands that attempts to control crime can backfire & may make the situation worse - Braithwaite, Wilkins, Cohen, young
• Emphasises that agents of social control may actually be one of the major causes of crime so we should think twice before giving them more power - EG the media generates folk devils = moral panic = deviancy amplification spiral
• Recognises that law enforcement is often discriminatory - cannot trust crime statistics - Cicourel

Question 11

Negative Evaluations of Labelling theory

Answer 11

• too deterministic - not everyone accepts and internalises their label
• Assumes offenders are passive ignores the personal choice to commit crime
• Gives offenders a ‘victim status’ - Realists argue that that this perspective ignores the victims of crime
• Emphasises neghative efffects of labelling and ignores the positive
• Fails to explain why acts of primary deviance exist - only focus on secondary deviance
• Structural sociologists claim their is a deeper structural explanation of crime - not just a product of labelling and interactions