LABELING THEORY
Today we are learning
- why labelling theorists regard crime and
deviance as socially constructed.
- how the labelling process works and the
consequences for those who are
successfully labelled.
What do you call a chav in a box
INIT
What do you call an Eskimo chav
in a box
INUINIT
INUITS of
Canada
INUITS of Canada
• Lemert investigated the longstanding problem of
chronic stuttering or stammering among the Inuits
• He argued that this is caused by the overemphasis on
ceremonial speech making
• Failure to speak well is a source of shame and
humiliation
• Children with the slightest speech difficulty became
overanxious because of peer group and parental
expectation
• This anxiety made the situation worse and led to
chronic stuttering, in other words public labelling
turned a minor problem into a major one
Task 1: The nature of Deviant acts.
• Read page 81 down to "Who gets labelled'
Deconstruct the following sentences
• "No act is inherently deviant in itself. It is society's
reaction to the act that makes it deviant."
• “Social groups create deviance by creating the rules
whose infraction (breaking) constitutes deviance,
and by applying those rules to particular people and
labelling them outsiders”
The labelling process & the effects of labelling
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Read pages 82/83 explain the key concepts.
Primary Deviance
Secondary Deviance
Self Fulfilling Prophecy
Self Concept
Deviant Career
Deviant subculture
Master status
Primary and secondary deviance
• Edwin Lemert (1972) makes the distinction between
primary and secondary deviance.
• Primary deviance refers to acts which have not been
publically labelled. Isolated, relatively insignificant
rule-breaking
• Secondary deviance refers to acts which have been
publically labelled as deviant and to the defiance
which is generated by this labelling. the construction
of deviant identity as a result of social REACTION to
the initial act.
LEMERT
Primary deviance
To Lemert it is pointless to seek the causes of
primary deviance because it is so widespread
that it is unlikely to have a single cause, and in
any case it is often trivial. For example fare
dodging which often goes unpunished.
Offenders often rationalise their wrong-doing
with justifications like ‘everyone else is doing
it’ or ‘I had a moment of madness’ or ‘laws
are there to be broken’.....
LEMERT
Primary deviance
Therefore acts of primary deviance have little
or no bearing on the individual’s status or selfconcept.
In essence primary deviants do not generally
see themselves as deviant.
LEMERT
Secondary deviance
The problem is of course when the deviance is
labelled, and some deviance is always labelled
by society.
Secondary deviance is the result of societal
REACTION (which is what labelling is of
course).
LEMERT
Secondary deviance
Being caught and publically labelled as a
criminal or deviant can involve being
stigmatised, shamed, humiliated, shunned or
excluded from mainstream society.
Others may come to see that person only in
terms of the label.
This becomes their MASTER STATUS or
controlling identity overriding all others.
LEMERT
Secondary deviance
In the eyes of the world the person is no longer a
colleague, father, or neighbour...that has changed
into thief, criminal, gangster, druggie....in other
words an OUTSIDER.
This can provoke a crisis for the individual’s selfconcept or sense of identity. This may be resolved by
acceptance of the deviant label so the individual
comes to see themselves as the world sees them –
the SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY. Now the individual
acts out or lives up to the deviant label causing
further deviance.
LEMERT
Secondary deviance
Lemert refers to the further deviance which
results from acting out the label as
SECONDARY DEVIANCE
In this theory then deviant identities are then
created and constructed through
INTERACTIONS between social control agents
(e.g. the police) and suspects.
Divide you into 4 groups
Junkie
•
•
•
•
•
Thief
Area seen as
deviant or
criminal e.g.
Colliers
Avenue,
Selsey The
Bronx in New
York….
Chav
CAN WE BE REALLY CLEVER AND LINK THE LABELLING PROCESS IN THESE
CASES TO
Lemert’s distinction between primary and secondary deviance
Societal reaction?
Actions of social control agents like the police
Self-fulfilling prophecy?
Master status?
Studies by William Chambliss, Jock Young.
How can we link this evidence to:
• Lemert’s notion of a distinction between
primary and secondary deviance – where is
the primary deviance and secondary
deviance?
• Societal reaction?
• Labelling?
• Self-fulfilling prophecy?
• Master status?
Labelling Theory challenges traditional theories
but turning traditional ideas on their head
• Why is some behaviour defined as criminal or
deviant in some contexts but not on others?
• Why are some individuals or groups more
likely to be defined as deviant?
• How do the responses of the agencies of
social control effect individuals future actions?
Societal reaction
• The reaction of society-the way others react to
someone labelled as deviant-may have a
dramatic effect on that person’s status and
identity and may lead to further deviant acts.
• Jock Young’s (1971) study of hippie marijuana
users in Notting Hill during the 1960s
illustrates this process.
A
Based on this stereotype,
B
The hippies develop a
C
A common stereotype of
the police start to act against
hippies to control marihuana
use.
deviant self-concept, including
distinctive clothes and long
hair.
drug-takers is established
by the mass media.
D
E
F
Police arrest more hippies
A fantasy crime wave has
The drug squad now
on drug charges.
been produced because of the
increase in arrests for drugtaking.
become involved in further
arrests of hippies for drugtaking.
G
H
I
This reinforces the police
The police share this
stereotype and leads to more
persecution of the hippies.
common stereotype of hippies
and label them as deviant.
J
K
Drug-taking now becomes a
central activity for the hippy
culture.
The hippies respond to this
action by retreating into a
small isolated group, excluding
others.
Hippies use marihuana as
a peripheral part of their
lifestyle.
Jock Young Deviancy Amplification Spiral
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C or I → C or I
→H
→A
→K
→G
→B
→D
→J
→F
→E
• How does Jock Young's Study of "DrugTakers'
illustrate the concepts of secondary deviance
and deviant career?
• How does it illustrate that drug taking is
socially constructed?
Moral Panic:
Stan Cohen developed the concept 'moral panic' to understand the role that
media play in the Amplification of Deviance
1. Tabloids report an activity/incident.
Sensationalist & Exaggerated headlines
2. Follow up stories identify a social group as a problem
Folk devils
3. Over simplified explanations
4. Moral entrepreneurs react
5. Rise in reporting - issue becomes part of public
consciousness
6. Authorties clamp down - Social Control
7 The group may react to the clamp down - Amplification
8. More arrests, moral panic becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
Deviance Amplification.
• In what ways does the reporting of knife
crime fit Cohen's model of a moral panic?
Becker
There is nothing intrinsically criminal about any act, it
only becomes so when the label is tagged to it.
‘deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label’
• Becker – saw the labelling process as creating
criminal careers. The reaction of society is crucial
here - The way others react to someone labelled as
deviant may have a dramatic effect on that person’s
status and identity and may lead to further deviant
acts:
•
•
•
•
Societal reaction
Labelling
Self-fulfilling prophecy – the prediction becomes the truth
Master status - status which overrides all other statuses.
LABELLING THEORY
The work of Lemert and Young illustrate the idea that
it is not the act itself, but the hostile SOCIETAL
REACTION by the social audience that creates serious
deviance.
Ironically therefore the social control processes that
are meant to produce law-abiding behaviour may in
fact produce the very opposite.
Note the last concluding line in Chambliss’s study
The Saints and the Roughnecks
“….One lesson is inescapable: The less the
intervention in the minor crimes of juveniles the
better off they and society will be.”
FREE WILL / NOT DETERMINSTIC
Labelling theorists are well aware that they can be
accused of being deterministic (those labelled will
inevitably become more criminal and/or deviant) and
that their theories might offer a form of excuse for
nasty crime. That is why they are keen to stress that
there is nothing inevitable about the labelling
process. Downes & Rock (2003) argue that we can
never predict whether someone who has been
labelled will follow a deviant career because they are
always free not to deviate further
TASK: write down two ways in which a person might
resist, reject or throw off a label
What do you think are
the strengths and
weakness of the Social
Action Approach to
Crime and deviance?
Quick Check Questions
• Please answer the questions on page 85.
– next
• Labelling & The ASBO
• In pairs explain how Interactionists might criticize the ASBO as a policy to
deter anti-social behaviour:
• Use the concepts.
• - Secondary deviance
• -Master Status
• - Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
• -Stigmatisatation
• Can you devise a more effective policy for tackling anti social
behaviour?
Homework
• Complete the exam question on page 85
• Just for fun what this