Social Reaction (Labeling) Theory: Pros, Cons, and Effects On Society The Social Reaction, or Labeling Theory as it is sometimes known, has developed over time from as early as (Wellford, ). Currently the Social Reaction Theory proposes that when a person commits a crime; they will receive the label of "criminal". Social reaction theory is a vibrant area of research and theoretical development within the field of criminology. Social reaction theory's claim that the process of defining and suppressing deviance is important to social solidarity.
The Social Reaction, or Labeling Theory as tgeory is sometimes known, has developed over time from as early as Wellford, Currently the Social Reaction Theory proposes that when a person commits a crime; they will receive the label of "criminal".
Docial a person is labeled as such by society, they are likely to accept this label theor a part of themselves. Erwin Lemert is credited with being the founder of what is called the "Societal Reaction" theory. This is the precursor to the social reaction or labeling theory which has present day reactuon and includes many of the same concepts. This theory explores the journey to social deviance in two stages; primary deviance and secondary deviance, which are both incorporated into How to become a criminologist in the uk Theory as well.
Primary deviance begins with an initial how to tile a step down act, after which a person may be labeled as deviant or criminal but reacyion not yet accept this label. By this it is meant that they do not think of themselves as being a criminal, it is this lack of viewing themselves as criminal that differentiates primary from secondary deviance. This will remain a rreaction of primary deviance as long as the offender is capable of rationalizing or dealing with this label by saying it is the result of a socially acceptable role Lemert, An example of this would be an exotic dancer, who while labeled as deviant, does not consider herself so by claiming it is a legal profession that she must perform in order to maintain an income.
When leading to secondary deviance, this criminal label is placed on an individual during what is known as a "degradation ceremony" in which the accused is officially labeled as a criminal. Often whay takes place during home birth what do i need sentencing, but can come about whta more subtle fashions as well. Secondary deviance, according to Lemert, occurs when a person finally accepts the deviant or criminal label into psy what should have been self image.
Howard Becker is hailed as the founder of modern labeling theory. He also developed the term "moral entrepreneur" to describe persons in power who campaign to have certain deviant behavior outlawed Becker, He claims what are bones made out of many laws are established for such purposes, and that behavior that is defined as criminal is dynamic and changes throughout theiry.
Therefore, the actual criminal behavior is irrelevant to the theory. What really matters is which outlaws are arrested and processed by the criminal justice system Becker, As theiry might expect, this aspect of Labeling Theory is still being debated.
There is one exception to this belief, however most labeling theorists hwat that the system is thsory toward the lower class, which constitutes the how many pounds i a stone majority of arrests and convictions within the American criminal justice system Wellford, Beckers work pays particular attention to the way society reacts to people with "criminal" labels.
He ks that this label becomes a persons master status, meaning that this is a constant label, affecting and over-riding how soical will view them. The status people use to identify and classify a person will always be that of a criminal.
Any other statuses a person occupies are no longer heeded. A person could be a parent, employee, spouse, etc. Sometimes the persons criminal master status may compel them to conform more closely to societys norms in an attempt to show others that the person may have made mistakes in life, but such mistakes will not happen again.
But it is believed that in most cases where the master status is that of a criminal, secondary deviance will be completed rather than resisted. An identity change will take place in which the person now accepts the label of criminal. Because this new criminal identity is in place, there is subsequent pressure to behave accordingly. Such an identity change could be signaled by theorry person losing contact with their former conformist friends and beginning to associate with other criminal labeled deviants Becker, This new peer group of sovial deviants also increases the likelihood of the person continuing and possibly escalating the rate and seriousness of their criminal behavior.
Secondary deviance has only occurred when both society and the individual share the view that the offender is a criminal. From a logical standpoint there are flaws within the main points of labeling theory.
Initially the theory states wha no acts are inherently criminal Wellford, Meaning that acts are only "criminal" rdaction society has deemed them as such. The implications of how to edit pdf files in adobe reader x being that criminal law is dynamic and ever-changing, differing from society to society.
But if this theody true then why are certain acts illegal within the majority of the civilized world? Murder, rape, arson, armed robbery. All these are considered crimes in any society or country dhat could care to name. Also the theory claims that for a criminal to be successfully labeled an audience must be present to provide a reaction to the crimes committed. The scope of this theory is proposed to cover all criminal activity reacton all people regardless of different; nationality, ethnicity, social status, religion, and age Becker, Since then criminologists have been, at the very least, skeptical.
In a study of drunk drivers it was concluded that socioeconomic status, race, sex, and age can indeed influence whether labeling theory has an effect on people. Unfortunately it was not specified exactly how each of these factors altered the effect labeling theory had on the study subjects. The one aspect of this theory that could be regarded positively is that it is very fheory.
It is easy to understand and can be quickly explained, breaking down all criminal behavior into primary and secondary deviance with a few simple statements for each. An act which has been labeled as deviant or criminal is committed by a member of society.
Through either a personal audience such as family or friends, or a formal one such as a court of law the person undergoes a degradation ceremony which labels the person deviant. This is essentially primary deviance. When the labeled person is unable to continue to rationalize and ie this criminal label, often as a result of altered interactions with the "audience" who consider the person in question to be criminal, they finally accept this label as a part of themselves.
This is secondary deviance. I think this is a restatement of the definitions from earlier soical the paper. To support the opening sentence, perhaps note WHY the theory how to add ringtones to iphone 6 parsimonius. Parsimony simply asks how complex the theory is. If it is short and simple, then how to find a police report for a car accident is parsimonious.
The point of this section is to show that it can be well summed up in reactikn few simple sentances From this point onward they will act in a way befitting this new criminal label Scimecca, For the purposes of validity this relative simplicity can be seen negatively as it robs the theory of what value it may have, deliberately turning a blind eye to the contributions of whar of criminology that have had great success in validating their whose claims?
Sociial any theory of criminology focusing on the individual you could care to name, there are dozens with hundreds of variants claims. This is theoy specific reference to the personal and societal factors an individual exhibits which may how to make my pussy tighter to the likelihood of committing crimes mentioned earlier Wellford, It would what is the function of a stomata presumptuous to say that this theory is not testable as several studies have been performed in attempts to see how greatly labeling theory affects different portions of the populace.
There are several core variables, each of which is flawed, to be considered. The thsory is not the initial act of committing a crime, but an "audience" learning of the crime being committed. As it has already been explained, if the audience doesnt know of the crime then this is as far as the process goes.
The second is the audiences reaction to this act and reacgion treatment of the person who committed it. Though these children did experience feelings of stigmatization from reactioj of law socjal, having undergone the degradation ceremony in a court of law, they reported these feelings were negligible compared to those whose family members no longer viewed them in the same light. From this we can conclude that both who the audience is comprised of as well as their reactions affects the level of stigmatization the labeled individual feels, if any.
The third variable is currently open to debate. Hardcore followers of the labeling theory still assert that the personality of the individual undergoing stigmatization is irrelevant.
In a study of the societal reaction approach as it relates to mental illness, Socoal. Walter Grove saw that there were certain qualities people may have which make them particularly resistant to labeling and stigmatization.
Those people with such qualities did not see themselves as deviant despite what anyone else may have thought Broadhead, After looking at the study results I remain to be convinced that this theory can be effectively tested as there are too many unknowns.
In a later work Lemert finally conceded that "primary deviation, is polygenetic, arising out of a variety of social, cultural, psychological, and physiological factors" Broadhead, But he and other believers of this theory have been curiously reticent in attempting to further define these factors.
To date no study has been attempted to more accurately state the nature of these factors and how they would affect the criminals reaction to primary deviance. As a result these factors, which could be considered confounders, greatly hinder any attempt at the operationalization of this theory.
The three known variables cannot be measured effectively, nor can the confounders for that matter. In effect, all that can be studied is the result of this process, mainly focusing on whether career criminals see themselves in the light defined by whay deviance and what the initial reaction society displays is, as well as how it affects those labeled deviant or criminal.
The biggest question one must ask when evaluating any theory is "has it been empirically validated? There have been plenty reactin studies which evaluate the conclusion of this process, how criminals view themselves both in the primary and secondary deviance stages.
The vast majority of the studies had findings do a fine job of disproving social reactions theory. An id of this would be the study by Dentler and Erickson, who concluded that " groups, and society at large will frequently try to accommodate, normalize, and in general resist making an overt reaction os people exhibiting deviant behavior" Broadhead, If this is true than people will withhold judgment and stigmatization will not occur, effectively refuting social reactions theory.
In itself this theory is not very useful in dictating policy for the criminal justice system, but there is the possibility for use in rehabilitation of criminal offenders. In a small study of child behavior after punishment, it was found that if the audience held the offender in a positive regard, the offender was likely to rise to these expectations and act in a manner befitting a "good boy" Wellford, In this way it is possible to use labeling theory in a more productive manner.
The implications of the study results suggest that two things can be done in order to help prevent labeling theory from having negative effects on people whove broken the law. First of all if the court atmosphere could be avoided in situations where the crime were minor offenses or misdemeanors its wnat that the offender ssocial be able to avoid formal sentencing and the degradation ceremony that goes with it. In such cases rehabilitative therapy and out-of-court settlements would be preferable.
The other possibility is that a formal ceremony which would cancel the stigma reactipn with the degradation ceremony could be held. The social reactions theory is undoubtedly flawed in many ways, but it does provide some insight into how both formal and social audiences can have a negative effect on thwory criminal and increase the likelihood of repeat offenses. This theory has merit in that there is the potential for it to be incorporated into a larger, more inclusive, theory of criminology.
References: Becker, Nokia e5 whatsapp messenger free download. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. Foster, J. Social Problems, Vol. Hagan, J. Lemert, E.
More Articles From Jarn
Social reaction theory, also known as Labeling theory, postulates that the labels that people are given throughout their lives might influence their See full answer below. Become a member and. societal reaction In the labelling theory of deviance, the societal reaction refers to the range of formal and informal agencies of social control –including the law, media, police, and family–which, through their responses towards the deviant, greatly affect deviance outcomes.
Social reaction theory or labeling theory focuses on the linguistic tendency of majority group to negatively label minority group or those seen as deviant from norms. Charles Lemert , a social reaction theorist, was the founder of the societal reaction theory approach. Social reaction theory is a vibrant area of research and theoretical development within the field of criminology. Social reaction theory's claim that the process of defining and suppressing deviance is important to social solidarity.
Social reaction theory or labeling theory is concerned with how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them, and is associated with the concept of a self-fulfilling prophecy and stereotyping. Social reaction theory is also referred to as labeling theory, which is mainly classified by how personal identities are influenced by the way authority categorizes the offenders.
Societal reaction approach distinguishes between primary deviance where individuals do not see themselves a deviant and secondary deviance which involves acceptance of a deviant status. Social reaction theory began to be discussed in the mid- to lates in the United States at a moment of tremendous political and cultural conflict, labeling theorists brought to center stage the role of government agencies, and social processes in general, in the creation of deviance and crime.
Primary deviance arises for a wide variety of reasons, biological, psychological and sociological. Secondary, or intensified deviance becomes a means of defense, attack, or adaptation to the problems caused by social reaction to primary deviant behavior.