Labeling Theories & Reintegrative Shaming PDF

Labeling Theories & Reintegrative Shaming Chapter 7 DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE & CRIMINOLOGY  Labeling Theories  The informal &/or formal application of stigmatizing, deviant “labels”, by society, on some individuals  “Labels” can be both the effect (dependent)...

Labeling Theories & Reintegrative Shaming Chapter 7 DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE & CRIMINOLOGY  Labeling Theories  The informal &/or formal application of stigmatizing, deviant “labels”, by society, on some individuals  “Labels” can be both the effect (dependent) & cause (independent) of deviance  As a dependent variable, theory attempts to explain why  Certain behavior is socially defined as ‘wrong’  Certain people are selected for ‘stigmatization & criminalization’  As an independent variable, theory posits that “labels” cause crime continuation & escalation  Actual deviance is ↓important than:  Who applies labels?  What determines when labels are applied? LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO  Labeling Theories  Howard S. Becker  University of Chicago  2nd wave of Chicago School – Bachelor’s by age 18 & PhD by age 23  Professor of Sociology, Northwestern University (1965–1991)  Eminent 20th century sociologist – “I’m not a criminologist”  W.E.B. DuBois Award (1998), ASA; 6 honorary doctorates  Becoming a Marihuana User (1953)  How users are labeled ‘social deviants’ (+ learning process)  Asked if he knew so much because he was smoking weed himself, he says, “Yeah. Obviously.” And does he still smoke it? “Yeah. Obviously.” (2015)  Outsiders (1963) LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO  Labeling Theories  Howard S. Becker (cont.)  Outsiders (1963)  The clearest, if not quite the earliest, statement of the “labeling” approach to the study of deviance  Social groups create deviance by:  1) Making rules whose infractions constitutes ‘deviance’ &  2a) Applying those rules to particular people & 2b) labeling them as ‘outsiders’  Deviance  Not a quality of the committed act, but rather…  A consequence of application, by others, of rules & sanctions  The Deviant  Is one to whom that label has successfully been applied  Adversely effects one’s self‐image, public image, & further social participation LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO  Labeling Theories  Symbolic Interactionism  An individual’s identity & self‐concept (i.e., values, attitudes, & cognitive processes) exist only in the context of social interactions with others  Emphasizes (Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934; Goffman, 1956; Becker, 1963)  Exchange of meanings communicated in face‐to‐face interaction through verbal, nonverbal (e.g., gestures), & context (e.g., tone)  Trump: “I know nothing about Russia. I know, I know about Russia.”  Interplay of this interaction with an individual’s self‐identify LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO  Labeling Theories  Symbolic Interactionism (cont.)  An individual’s identity & self‐concept (i.e., values, attitudes, & cognitive processes) exist only in the context of social interactions with others  Exchange of meanings communicated in face‐to‐face interaction (i.e., non‐/verbal)  Interplay of this interaction with an individual’s self‐identify  Cooley’s (1902) looking‐glass self  Our self‐concepts are reflections of others’ conceptions of us  We are – or we become – what others think we are  Negative labels act as independent variable, causing crime  Self‐fulfilling prophecy (Merton, 1957) LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO  Labeling Theories  Types of Deviance (Lemert, 1951; 1967)  Primary Deviance  Arises from variety of sources (e.g., genetic, psychological, & sociological)  Is sporadic & transitory (i.e., unorganized, inconsistent, & infrequent)  Individual commits deviance without  Realizing the act(s) is deviant &/or  Holding a deviant self‐concept (i.e., seeing themselves in a ‘deviant social role’)  Social Response  Most deviance is ignored, rationalized, or elicits some social penalties from informal social audiences (i.e., parents, teachers, & peers)  Without “societal reaction”, deviance remains infrequent  Some deviance elicit more serious social sanction(s) from formal control agents (e.g., juvenile/ criminal justice systems)  Formal “societal reaction(s)” can spur the labeling process LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO Labeling Theories  Types of Deviance (Lemert, 1951; 1967) (cont.)  Labeling Process  Spurred by formal “societal reaction(s)” to primary deviance  Ways labeling can lead to secondary deviance  1. Alter self‐concept (i.e., internalize “deviant” or “criminal” identity)  2. Limit conventional opportunities & relationships (i.e., educational, occupational, social, & romantic)  3. Encourage movement into deviant subculture(s) Labeling Theories  Deviance & Labeling Sequence (Lemert, 1951; 1967) 3. Further primary 1. Primary deviation 2. Social penalties deviation (school prank (penalized by teacher) (new disruption due to high energy) due to clumsiness) 6. Community 5. Further deviation 4. Stronger penalties stigmatizes the deviant (prank against & rejection (gains “bad boy” label the same teacher) (sent to principal’s office) in school) 8. Ultimate acceptance of 7. Strengthening of deviant social status & deviant conduct as assumption of deviant identity result of stigmatization (realizes “bad boy” identity (delinquent act) produces punishments & rewards)  For Next Week…  For Friday (Nov. 8th):  Test 3 [Chapters 5 – 7] LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO