Labelling Theory

Question 1

What is labelling theory?

Answer 1

Becker (1963): his key statement about labelling is: “Deviancy is not a quality of the act a person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender’. Deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label.”

Question 2

Police and labelling

Answer 2

Studies of police officers by sociologists such as Townsley and Marshall’s study show that they operate using stereotypical assumptions or labels about what is ‘suspicious’ or ‘criminal’ in terms of social types and behaviour.

For example the decision to stop or arrest someone may be based on whether they correspond to a stereotype.

Question 3

Holdaway - racial stereotyping

Answer 3

Holdaway notes that there is strong evidence that suggests racial stereotyping by some police officers may be a crucial element governing their decision to stop black people and their interaction with black people, especially African-Caribbeans, i.e. some officers see all black people as potentially criminal.

Home Office statistics on police stop and search released in March 2010 can be used to support the idea that racial stereotyping underpins policing because they reveal that the police stop and search black people and Asians six times and two times respectively more than white people.

Question 4

Is it solely ethnicity?…

Answer 4

It is not just black people who are stereotyped by the police.

It may also be the case that young people, males and working-class people fit a criminal stereotype and may be more likely to be the subject of police attention than older people, females and the middle-class respectively.

Question 5

The negotiation

Answer 5

Cicourel found that other agents of social control within the criminal justice system reinforce this bias.

For example, probation officers held the common sense theory that juvenile delinquency is caused by broken homes, poverty and poor parenting.

Therefore they tend to see youths from such backgrounds as likely to offend in the future and were more likely to support custodial sentences for them.

Question 6

Justice is not fixed…

Answer 6

Cicourel concludes that justice is often not fixed but negotiable.

For example, in his study, when a middle-class youth was arrested, he was less likely to be charged because his social background did not fit the police’s ideas of a ‘typical delinquent’ but also because his parents were able to negotiate successfully on his behalf.

They were more able than working-class parents to convince agents of social control that they would monitor him to make sure he stayed out of trouble. As a result he was ‘counselled, warned and released’ whilst working-class youths up for the same offences were charged with a criminal offence.

Cicourel is particularly critical of the official crime statistics – he argues that these tell us more about the negotiation of justice according to social class rather than about crime and criminality.

Question 7

Why labelling theory?

Answer 7

Labelling theory yes focuses on how these labels are formed as illustrated by the above, however they are mainly interested in the effects of labelling rather than why people commit crime in the first place.

Question 8

Primary Deviance

Answer 8

Primary deviance refers to deviant acts that have not been publicly labelled, i.e. the person committing the act has not been observed or caught.

Lemert argues that primary deviance is widespread and often trivial in nature. Such acts have little significance for a person’s status or identity. Those who commit primary deviance often do not see themselves as deviant.

Question 9

Secondary Deviance

Answer 9

Secondary deviance is that which is spotted and punished by people who have more power than the person committing the act. There is therefore a societal reaction to the act.

This societal reaction and the subsequent labelling of the person as a criminal, deviant, etc is known as ‘secondary deviance’. Both Becker and Lemert argue that secondary deviance can have negative consequences in that being caught and publicly labelled as a criminal can involve being stigmatized, shunned and excluded from normal society.

Question 10

Negative effect - The negative label may undermine the self-esteem of the labelled individual

Answer 10

1) The negative label may undermine the self-esteem of the labelled individual. Labels such as ‘deviant’, ‘criminal’ ‘paedophile’, ‘ex-con’ etc are so powerful in their effect that they over-ride all other statuses in a person’s life.

The negative label becomes a ‘master status’ which is used by society to interpret all future behaviour by that individual.

For example, if a person is labelled a ‘sex offender’, this label mainly shapes other people’s reactions to the individual regardless of the other statuses, i.e. father, son, neighbour etc that they might have. In short, the labelled individual is regarded as an outsider by society.

Question 11

Negative effect - Secondary deviance may provoke further hostile reactions from society and reinforce the deviant’s ‘outsider’ status

Answer 11

2) Secondary deviance may provoke further hostile reactions from society and reinforce the deviant’s ‘outsider’ status.

For example, prejudice and discrimination may be practiced against those who have been labelled, e.g. ex-cons may find it difficult to find legitimate employment.

Question 12

Negative effect - There is the danger that prejudice and discrimination may lead to a ‘deviant career’

Answer 12

3) There is the danger that prejudice and discrimination may lead to a ‘deviant career’.

The practical consequences of treating a person as a deviant may produce a ‘self fulfilling prophecy’ in so much that the person labelled may begin to see themselves as deviant and act accordingly.

The original prophecy (i.e. label) is then fulfilled.

Question 13

Negative effect - Labelling may also increase the chances of re-offending

Answer 13

4) Labelling may also increase the chances of re-offending by isolating the individual from society by encouraging friends and family to reject them they may consequently seek comfort, sympathy, normality and status in a ‘subculture’ of others who have been branded with a similar label which compensates them for the societal reaction.

Question 14

Subcultures

Answer 14

Such subcultures normally have distinct value systems and rules of behaviour complete with their own definitions of ‘normality’ and ‘deviance’ which may conflict with mainstream society. In other words, these subcultures may commit further crime and deviance and attract more negative societal reaction as a result.

Question 15

Deviancy amplification

Answer 15

The official attempt to control deviance or crime leads to an increase in the level of deviance.

This leads to even greater attempts to control it and, this in turn produces even higher levels of deviance.

More and more control produces more and more deviance in an escalating spiral or snowball process. In this sense, therefore, Lemert argues that deviance is actually caused by social control.

Question 16

Example of deviancy amplification

Answer 16

Triplett (2000) notes an increasing tendency to see young offenders as evil and to be less tolerant of minor deviance such as truancy.

The use of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders in the UK may be having a similar effect – studies suggest that young people may be viewing these as ‘badges of honour’.

Question 17

How can we use labelling theory to reduce crime?

Answer 17

Labelling theory has suggested that in order to reduce crime and deviance governments need to make and enforce fewer rules. For example, by de-criminalising soft drugs, we might reduce the number of people with criminal convictions.

Fewer rules (and therefore infringements of those rules) may result in less negative societal reaction and therefore less ‘naming and shaming’ of people. Less shaming may mean less re-offending.

Question 18

Social policy and shaming

Answer 18

Braithwaite (1989) suggests there are two types of shaming available to the criminal justice system:

> Disintegrative shaming
Reintegrative shaming

Question 19

Disintegrative shaming

Answer 19

Involves the deviant or criminal being labelled as bad and normally involves the offender being excluded from society.

The individual’s previous life and status ‘disintegrates’ as a result of the deviant/criminal master status. This is the most common outcome of the present criminal justice system.

Question 20

Reintegrative shaming

Answer 20

Labelling sociologists believe this type of shaming should be adopted by the criminal justice system.

It involves labelling the act of deviance rather than the person who carried it out, e.g. as if to say ‘he has done a bad thing’ rather than ‘he is a bad person’.

Question 21

Disintegrative vs Reintegrative

Answer 21

Braithwaite argues that the concept of reintegrative shaming avoids stigmatizing or negatively labelling the offender as ‘evil’ or ‘bad’ while at the same time making them aware of the negative impact of their actions upon others.

This makes it easier for the victim, the offender and the community to separate the offender from the offence, to forgive them and to re-admit the wrongdoer back into mainstream society. At the same time, it avoids pushing wrongdoers into more deviance.

Question 22

Positives of labelling theory

Answer 22

> Labelling theory has shown that defining deviance is a complex rather than a simple process – that it is socially constructed through interaction with others and that deviance is very often a matter of interpretation.

> Labelling theory has clearly shown that definitions of deviance are relative and therefore not fixed, universal or unchangeable. Definitions of deviance (and crime) are constantly in a state of change.

> Labelling theory illustrates quite convincingly that definitions of deviance often stem from power differences.

> Labelling theory shows that the law is often enforced selectively, i.e. in a discriminatory fashion, and consequently crime statistics are more a record of the activities of the police rather than criminals.

> Labelling theory shows that society’s attempts to control deviance can backfire and create more deviance rather than less.
Labelling theory was the first theory to draw attention to the social consequences of being labelled a deviant.

Question 23

Negatives of labelling theory

Answer 23

> Marxists argue that although labelling theory acknowledges the role of power, it does not explain the origin of that power – Marxists, of course, argue that power originates in class relationships and that labelling is an ideological process which supports the interests of the ruling class and is often used by that class to socially control the powerless.

> Labelling theory tends to be deterministic – it implies that once someone is labelled, a deviant career is inevitable. Downes and Rock (2003) argue that we cannot predict whether someone who has been labelled will follow a deviant career, because they are always free to choose not to deviate further.

> Left Realists argue that labelling theory’s emphasis on the negative effects of labelling gives the offender a kind of victim status. Labelling theory may be guilty of over-romanticising deviance and blaming the agencies of social control for causing crime. This obviously ignores the real victims of crime.

> Ackers argues that labelling theory puts too much emphasis on societal reaction – he argues that the act is always more important than the reaction to it, e.g. rape, murder and child abuse are always deviant.

> Critics argue that people who commit these crimes clearly know this, i.e. they don’t need a societal reaction to bring it to their attention. They are aware they are going against social norms. They don’t need to wait until a label is attached to understand that what they are doing is wrong.

> However, Plummer, in defence of labelling theory, points out that labelling theory’s emphasis on societal reaction is valuable because many activities are defined as deviant or non-deviant depending on the audience and/or the social context in which it occurs, e.g. soft drug use is acceptable to many younger people but is deemed deviant by the establishment.

> Labelling theory fails to explain the origin of deviance – it does not explain why people commit primary deviance in the first place before they are labelled or why people choose to commit particular types of crime or deviance rather than others.

Question 24

Outline three criticisms of labelling theory (6 marker)

Answer 24

1) It is too deterministic - labelling theory implies that once someone is labelled, a deviant career is inevitable.

2) Fails to explain the origin of deviance - labelling theory does not address why people commit deviant acts before they are labelled.

3) People who commit crimes already know this - criminals and deviants are already aware that their actions deviate against societal norms and values.