Introduction to Criminological Theory: Labelling Theory - Coursework Example

Introduction to Criminological Theory LABELLING THEORY Introduction From the late 1960s to the 1970s Labelling Theory was accepted as the main sociological theory of crime. Labelling theory focuses on societal reaction to crime which could range from the informal responses of public opinion or the mass media to more formal responses of police, courts and prisons. The theory suggests that crime may be heightened by criminal sanctions, stigmatising minor violations at an early age may lead a young offender into a criminal career, and sending a young offender to prison may criminalise him or her further. The theory advances that criminology should not focus on criminals as types of people, but should highlight the numerous social control responses from the law, police, media and the public that define crime. Key labelling theorists such as Howard Becker, Edwin Lemert, Herbert Mead and Stanley Cohen have attributed deviance and a criminal way of life to labelling [Carrabine et al, 2004]1. Thesis statement: The purpose of this paper is to describe the key characteristics of labelling theory by various theorists, and to comment on its contribution to understanding crime. Discussion The central question that has confronted the sociology of deviance and crime, is whether deviancy which is anti-social behaviour that breaks the laws of society, is the result of inherent characteristics. On the other hand, is it behavior that is created by the social environment into which a person is born or brought up. Are people born deviants, criminals, or does society make them antisocial by the way it treats and responds to them, is the core question. As symbolic interactionism grew in popularity in the 1950s and 1960s, a range of sociologists began to develop the Theory of Labelling, that is the “social labelling that we apply to certain people, and the way we treat them thereafter that causes and amplifies deviancy” [Slattery, 2003: 134]2 rather than any genetic characteristics that they may have been born with. Howard Becker was a leading figure in the labelling theory movement. Howard Becker’s Labelling Theory Howard S. Becker (1963) who studied the ways in which cultures and careers were completely destroyed due to negative sanctions against drug use, indicated the key part played by labelling. According to him, in research and theory building, it was essential to understand who applies the label of deviant to whom, the consequences that result on a person labelled, and the circumstances under which the label of a deviant is successfully applied. According to Becker [1963: 9]3, “social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders”. Becker outlined the stages by which a person is transformed from being seen as a normal person to being labelled as deviant. Initially, there is a public labelling, which is an informal process and which slowly leads to a public ceremony and an official definition of a person as not only acting in an odd or deviant manner but being a deviant person. Examples are the delinquent who ends up in court and is sent to prison as a criminal; the drunk who is diagnosed by a doctor or psychiatrist as an alcoholic, or the mentally disturbed person diagnosed as schizophrenic and sent to an asylum for treatment. The second stage is that once these labels have been applied, they become the master label and dominate over all other symbols and statuses that the individual had held previously, such as father, friend or employer. Since other people see the person in a totally new light, they react very differently usually by rejecting, isolating and castigating him or her as a deviant and someone with whom they no longer have a relationship. This results in such examples as the alcoholic who ends up homeless or the ex-convict unable to secure a job or buy a house [Slattery, 2003]4. The third stage in Becker’s outline is that the rejection invariably affects the individual’s self image or perception of himself. Many respond by living up to their deviant label, by becoming deviant or adopting a deviant lifestyle or even a deviant career. Examples are a juvenile delinquent who becomes a professional criminal, the drug-user who becomes a junkie and a drug addict. These individuals often withdraw from the mainstream, go underground and live alternative lifestyles, “seeking support and status among fellow deviants in deviant subcultures” [Slattery, 2003: 135]5. In this way, a cycle of labelling can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. Other Important Theories of Labelling Becker’s labelling theory which is considered to be of an orthodox nature, evolved into the theory of moral panics, social constructionist theories, and theories of social control. Stanley Cohen (1972) developed the theory of moral panic from the labelling theory. He focused on one of the first major youth phenomena in the United Kingdom in the 1960s. This was the rise of the so-called mods and rockers. The two groups clashed with each other, causing increasing concern to the public and law-enforcement agencies. The theory of moral panics refers to the exaggerated responses of control agencies, such as the media in stirring up concern and anxiety, and thereby causing more incidents of a similar manner to occur with increasing frequency [Cohen, 2002]6. Another theory that has emerged from the labelling theory is that of social constructionism. This sociological approach to criminology argues that conditions must be brought to people’s notice in order to become social problems. Closely associated to Becker’s notion of moral enterprise, this theory highlights the ways in which individuals, groups and societies label certain phenomena as problems and others then respond to such claims. Examples are the drink-driving problem and that of child victims. Labelling theory also enables an increased understanding of social control, need for policies of decriminalization, deinstitutionalization, and the creation of social movements related to such activities [Carrabine et al, 2004]7. George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) adapted the labelling theory to symbolic interactionism or social constructivism. That is, the identity of a person and his social role are both socially constructed. They do not exist ‘objectively’ separate from social life and culture. Herbert Mead observed that many children steal but few become professional thieves; conversely, most do homework, but few become real scholars. Differences in talent and opportunity are important. A youth who is caught and punished repeatedly for theft may come to be known as a thief, whereas one who gets away does not. Having the identity of ‘thief’ may close some doors, making it harder to find a job. Accepting the label for oneself may reduce inhibitions about stealing in the future. That is, the identity of the person and the social role of ‘thief’ in this case, are both socially constructed [Calhoun, 2007]8. Lemert (1951, 1967) argued that strong and negative responses to minor deviances such as truancy or under-age drinking which are otherwise commonly accepted, can cause bitterness. This can lead to increased manifestation of the same activities and the seeking out of people who condone these behaviour. “So the response to initial deviance can set in motion secondary deviance, by which an individual engages in repeated norm violations and begins to take on a deviant identity” [Lemert, 1967: pp.40-41]9. The development of secondary deviance is an application of the Thomas theorem which states that situations defined as real result in similar consequences. The differences between primary and secondary deviance in Lemert’s theory given above, forms the distinction between original and effective causes of deviance. Primary deviation arises from many sources but impacts the status and psychic structure of the individual only to a marginal degree. On the other hand, secondary deviation refers to the ways in which stigma and punishment can actually make the crimes or deviance become centralized in the individual, changing the psychic structure, producing related social roles and affecting self concept. These have far-reaching effects. Lemert argued that rather than seeing crime as leading to control, it is essential to see the process as one in which “control agencies structured and even generated crime” [Carrabine et al, 2004]10. Conclusion This paper has highlighted labelling theory and its contribution to understanding crime. Becker outlined the three main stages by which a person is transformed from being seen as a normal person to being labelled as deviant. These are public labelling, domination of the master label over other symbols and statuses of the individual, and rejection of the labelled individual from the mainstream. The other important theories of labelling discussed above are by Cohen, Mead and Lemert. They are the theory of moral panic, symbolic interactionism, social constructionism, and the development of secondary deviations from primary deviation. Thus, it was found that if a person is labelled as a deviant, they ultimately become one, and live up to their image as a deviant, master criminal or mad man [Slattery, 2003]11. Bibliography Becker, H.S. (1963). Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press. Calhoun, C.J. (2007). Contemporary sociological theory. The United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing. Carrabine, E., Eganski, P., Lee, M., Plummer, K. & South, N. (2004). Criminology: a sociological introduction. London: Routledge. Cohen, S. (2002). Folk devils and moral panics. Great Britain: Routledge. Lemert, E. (1967). Human deviance, social problems and social control. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Slattery, M. (2003). Key ideas in Sociology. London: Nelson Thornes. Read More