Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory Flashcards
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
Labling and it’s types
To give someone a lable
• To make a judgement of someone ( can start from what an indivisual said or a common steryotype)
Positive labling examples
• funny, kind, warm, smart, friendly, caring, lovley
Negative Labels Examples
• Twat, moron, stupid, idiot, fool, chav, ect.
Retrospective Labling
• Label someon based on their past behaviours
Projective labelling
• Predicting future behaviours baded on the deviant’s Identity
Stigma attached to a label
• a label with a stigma
• Hard to remove once given, a mark of Discrase, Effects confidence/ self esteem/ self concept/ future development
• e.g. Criminal
Informal Labeling
• The respondant’s perception of others (e.g. family or neighbours ect.) thought of them as “bad” or a “troublemaker” ect.
Formal Labelling
• whether or not the respondant has ever been “processed” by the criminal justice system (e.g. arrested, charged, tried, convicted for any offence before the one they go to prison for
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
how may stigma and stereotypes explain criminality ?
SFP leads to internalising and conforming to a label/ stereotype
• start to beleive the lable/ stereotype and then internalise it, and beleive that is who they are, and given little chance to proove otherwise
• get treated differently (neg) according to the label given (stigma)
• effects persons Self esteem/ concept
• once label internalised then act like the label, if its a negative label such as “person is violent” then due to all the people treating them differently, they actualy become violent, possibly leading to criminal behaviour, then they do crime, and now they are really a criminal
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
social context and becker
Becker (someone who heavily contributed to creating the theory) pointed out that people react differently to the same act depending on social context, this influences the label placed on the act.
• e.g. Killing someon usualy labelled as a murderer, but in War its normalised and some are labelled heros
• there may be no majority of oppinion over the application of the label (what label is chosen for a persons actions) because “one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter”
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
Affects of labelling
Labelling
• may Affects an indivisuals self concept (how you see yourself) and lead to SFP
• may affect how others treat you and may lead to SFP
• society may label people according to the way others treat you, this may lead to SFP
• due to internalising criminal labels and lowering their self concept / esteem, they are more likley to commit crime again (due to internalising the label and people mistreating them because of said label) meaning it explains recividism
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
key terms
deviant
• someone or a group that has commited an unaccepted behaviour in a paticular communitt (against the social norm)
• (someone who violates social norms)
Label
• to judge someone (usualy neg) based on what a person has said or done, their background (e.g. education, family, class), features ( race, facial features, height) or stereotypes
• dosen’t nessasarily reflect true nature of the indivisual
• oftern given by a majority to a minority
Primary Deviance
• a person who commits a deviant action without knowing they are going against social norms
Secondary Deviance
• a person that is already labeled as a deviant, but they still continurme to engage in that paticular deviant act.
Stigma
• a mark of discrace, something that, once given, is hard to remove, people only look for what they want to see in the person ( the stigma)
• affects persons self concept and self efficacy and self esteem and future behaviour/ development
Stereotypes
• thinking a whole group shares a characteristic, based on a generalised/ simplified view
e.g. young + hoodie = crime
Self Concept
• knowing who you are as a person
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
Self Fulfilling prophecy (SFP)
SFP
Stage 1
• perceiver has expectations of a target person (based of a label or steryotype)
• E.g. the man in the puffer jacket looks unfriendly
Stage 2
• the perceiver’s behaviour towards the target reflects their expectations of them (label/ steryotypes)
• e.g. Avoid the man in the puffer jacket when walking past, avert eyes from them, quick walk, look uneasy around them, run off if they reach into a pocket
Stage 3
• The targets behaviour towards the perceiver reflects how the perceiver has treated them
• e.g. Man in puffer jacket stabs someone
Prophecy is fulfilled
Simple version
someone gives someone else a label/ stereotype
they misstreat them based on the expectations from that label/ stereotype
the person internalises the label, making their self concept beleive they are the label, and therefore act in the expected was according to the label
prophecy is fulfilled
(explains recividism as if crim comes out of prison > treated differently as they are crim and went to prison > internalise label more > reoffend)
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
Evidence +
Rosenthal and Jaconson 1968
bloomers iq study in children
Rosenthal and jacobson 1968 is evidence to support SFP and Labeling theory causing criminal behaviour
• children were chosen at random to become “ bloomers” and receive more attention and praise from teachers
• after a year these “bloomers” had higger IQ than Non-bloomers
• this prooves that possitive labels work at altering behaviours compared to no labeling, therefore it can be assumed that negative labels such as “criminal” would work with SFP too
• therefore this supports SFP causing criminal behaviour as it showed that possitive labeling and SFP positivley changed behaviour, so negative labeling would do the same for negative behaviour such as offending.
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
How good is the research -
Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968
low internal validity (natural iq )
Rosenthal and Jacobson 1958 is poor evidence to support SFP
• this is due to the extraneous variable that these “bloomers” children could have naturaly improoved their IQ, as they cluld have been more confident with the topics or natural learners
• this indivisula difference is a confounding variable (as IV (bloomers) could have improoved naturaly and the IQ (DV) could be natural and therefore not affected by Labelling) that means the results that Labeling affects behaviour could be invalid, giving the study low internal validity as cause and effect between the labels and IQ level cannot be accuratly established.
• meaning that Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) is poor research to support the explenation that SFP and Labeling theory causes criminal behaviour, and poor evidence to support SFP and Labeling theory perioid.
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
evidence -
Fuller 1984
London school Girls not internalised and not let neg labels affect them
Fuller 1984 is opposing evidence to SFP and SFP cuasing Criminal behaviour
• Black girls in a comprehensive school in London were labeled as ‘expected to fail’
• but they tried to proove them wrong and did they passed
• showing ressiliance to SFP due to indivisual differences in these girls deciding that they wouldn’t give up
• meaning that this study opposes SFP and labeling theory which states Negative labels should effect self concept and esteem, allowing for them to be internalised then SFP, however the girls used it as motivation to disproove teachers, showing SFP doesnt always occur and Negative labels dont always negativley affect self concept / esteem, meaning the study opposes the explenation that SFP and labeling theory Causes criminal behaviour, and opposes SFP and labeling theory all together
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
How good is research +
Fuller 1984
High eco real school
Fuller 1984
• the study took place in a real school in london (field study) showing that SFP dosnt always occur and Negative labels dont alway have negative effects on Self Concept and esteem occurs in real life and is therefore likely/ able to do so again
• giving the stidy high ecological validiy as the results are likley and did occur in real life, meaning Fuller 1984 is good evidence to oppose SFP and Labeling theroy and these theorys causing Criminal Behaviour
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
comparison to the Amygdala +/-
internal - eco +
Compared to problems with the Amygdala, SFP and labeling theory is a worse explenation of criminal behaviour
• Research done on the Amygdala is Highly controlled and Scientific/ objective, Such as Raine et al 1997 who found that in NGRI murdererd had higher glucoues metabolism rates in the right amygdala and lower in the left, than non- murderers, showing that a problem/ difference in the amygdala was a factor in why these were NGRI Murderes. They found this out by scanning the murderers and non murseres brains with a PET scan, which shows High areas of Activity in Red and low areas in blue, this is an extreemly objective and scientific method as the PET scan can only be invalid if the method used to stimulate the brain is innacurate, or the readings of the PET scan are misread (by a human) making Research that supports Problems/ differences in the Amygdala high in Internal validity
• whereas in SFP and Labeling theory, evidence is mainly feild reseach such as Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968, who used a real classroom with real children who were unaware of the study, meaning that there are very few controls so many extraneoys variables such as natural IQ increase in the childrens as they found the topics over the year easy (effecting the data and conclusion)
• however being a feild study means the results are likley and have, occured in real life giving feild studys used to support SFP and labeling theory High ecological validity
• overal Problems/ differences with the amygdala is a better explemation of criminal behaviour than SFP and labeling theoy interms of internal Validity whereas SFP and labeling theory is better than differences and problems with the amygdala in terms of ecological validity
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
conclusion + ap
In conclusion SFP and labeling theory has shown that it is exteemly plausable as an explenation of criminal behaviour, via the internalisation of the label “criminal” as it has a variety of evidence to support it with High ecological validity due to being mainly field studys, meaning the results of said studys are likley to occur in real life
• an application of SFP and Labeling Theory is that is can be used to explain why XYY syndrome men commit crime after Witken 1976 discovered that They were more likeley to comit crimes due to social factors rather than biology
• as XYY men are labeled as criminals due to negative steryotypes (mainly from criminals using it as a scapegoat) then the XYY men internalise the label after being mistreated and then actualy become a criminal and do crime. therefore SFP and Labeling theory explains why XYY men commit crimes, despite being as violent as normal men.
It can also be applied to rehabilitation, as if criminals are given possitive labels, they will A. be more willing to rehabilitate B. likely to increase self concept and uninternalise the criminal label
• also if they get them a job where colleuges dont judge or mistreat them they are even more likley to reoffend and internalise the label
showing how sfp and labeling theory can be used to aid rehabilitation of criminals
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
evidence +
Jahoda 1954
Ashanti people in Ghana
boy names and days of the week causing crimes
Jahoda 1954 studied the Ashanti people of ghana
they name their baby boys after the day of the week
Monday= Kwadwo (associated with politness)
Tuesday = Kwabena
Wednesday = Kwaku (associated with aggression)
Thursday = Yaw or Yaa
Friday = Kofi
Saturday = Kwame
Sunday (boys and girls) = Kwasi or Kwesi
Jahoda looked ar Juvinile court records over a 5 year perioid
22% of violent offences were commited by Kwaku (wednesday boys)
only 6.9% was by Kwadwo (monday boys)
• meaning the labeling led to them internalising the aggressive label associated with wednesday
• leading to them becoming aggressive and doing violent crime
• therefore supporting SFP and labeling theory as a Cause of criminal behaviour as the theory demomstrates how this occurs among the Ashanti people of Ghana
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
How good is the research +/- Jahoda 1954
ethnocentric, andronic and eco
+
• Jahoda 1954 is good research to support SFP and Labeling theory as it was an annalysis or real life juvenile offenders court records of the Ashanti people in Ghana, meaning the evidence was real and Did occur in real life, meaning it has high Ecological validity and is therefore good research to support SFP and Labeling theory as an explenation of criminal behaviour
–—‐—–
Jahoda 1954 is poor research to support SFP and labeling theory as an cause of criminal behaviour
• this is due to it being ethnocentric as only the people of The Ashanti in Ghana were involved, meaning the results that sfp and laveling theory causes criminal behaviour can’t be applied to other cultures and women, as the study was also andronic as all the cases reviewed were men.
Labling and Self Fulfilling prophecy theory
how good research +
rosenthal and jacobson 1968
eco
evidence is mainly feild reseach such as Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968, who used a real classroom with real children who were unaware of the study, being a feild study means the results are likley and have, occured in real life giving feild studys used to support SFP and labeling theory, such as Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968 High ecological validity
