Complete Assignment

THEORIES OF CRIME.6
 CR 4550 Dr. Lee Blackstone

What’s in a name?

Labeling Theory

Labeling Theory

‘Labeling theory’ deals with the application of stigmatizing, deviant ‘labels’ that people in society put on others.

Labeling Theory

1960s Context: Criticism of Social Institutions

Civil Rights Vietnam

Questioning power…and who declared whom ‘deviant’ or ‘criminal’…

Erving Goffman (1922-1982): Stigma (1963)

Stigma: as a “deeply discrediting”

characteristic (p. 3), one that ‘disrupts’ social interaction and which ‘normals’ try

to avoid in their contact with others

Howard Becker: Outsiders (1963)

“Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. From this point of view, deviance is NOT a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender.’” (p. 9)

Becker’s fieldwork involved jazz musicians who played live for strip clubs. These men held unconventional hours; had difficulty maintaining ‘normal’ relations with women; and smoked marijuana. [Becker’s examination of the group’s marijuana use is famous.] The jazz musicians felt that they were part of the ‘hip’ crowd, while those outside their group were ‘squares.’ The musicians were aware that the ‘squares’ labeled them due to their unconventional lifestyle.

Becker’s Outsiders (1963)

Labeling Theory

Labeling theorists would argue that the deviant behavior a person is engaged in is of secondary importance. The key question is: who applies the label to whom, and what determines when a label will be assigned to an individual?

This is viewed as particularly important when FORMAL control agents are involved.

Labeling Theory

Labeling theorists usually argue that it is agents of control – working on behalf of the powerful in society – who place labels on others. (We will see this reflected in conflict theory, too.)

Labeling Theory

Designating someone a criminal or deviant is not directly determined by an actual violation of law, or commission of a criminal act.

For the same law-violating behavior: people from less- powerful groups are more likely to be labeled and punished than those from more powerful groups.

Attaching a stigmatizing label to a person has more to do with WHO he or she is, rather than WHAT that person has actually done.

In 2011, ‘juggalos’ – fans of the group Insane Clown Posse – were labeled a ‘criminal threat’ by the FBI.

Labeling Theory

The West Memphis Three: Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley, Charles (Jason) Baldwin – Convicted, 1994; Freedom through plea bargain, 2011

Labeling Theory

Part of the argument here is that law and the criminal justice system represent the interests of the middle and upper

classes – and dominant groups in society – over the lower- class and minority groups.

(Again: similar to ‘conflict’ theory…)

Labeling Theory

The chance that a person will be arrested, convicted, and imprisoned is determined by one’s race, sex, age, social class – ‘extralegal factors’ – social characteristics that define status in society and membership in powerful or powerless groups.

[Sidebar: Donald Black]

Donald Black’s The Behavior of Law (1976):

Numerous propositions in a book making predictions about the nature and ‘flow’ of law: including the idea that ‘more law’ is directed at minority groups and individuals with less power.

Labeling Theory

Becker would argue something similar in Outsiders. Becker called those who were able to label less powerful groups ‘MORAL ENTREPRENEURS.’

Roots of Labeling Theory

Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic Interactionism

Labeling Theory – as an explanation of criminal and deviant behavior – is derived from the Symbolic Interactionist

paradigm in sociology.

Symbolic Interactionism

In the theory, an individual’s identity and self-concept, values, attitudes, and cognitive processes exist ONLY in the context of society acting, reacting, and changing in social interaction with others.

SI emphasizes the exchange of meanings in face-to-face interactions through language, oral statements, gestures, and how these interact with a person’s self- identity. This moves us towards the ‘symbolic’ dimension of meaning, of words and actions and how they are perceived by social actors.

Symbolic Interactionism

Herbert Blumer (1900-1987) argued that for symbolic interactionism, meaning does not come ‘from’ the thing, nor does it come from psychological processes.

INSTEAD: MEANING COMES FROM THE PROCESS OF INTERACTION BETWEEN PEOPLE – IT IS A SOCIAL PROCESS.

Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic Interactionism

In Symbolic Interaction: meaning is constantly being affirmed, modified, negotiated, and abandoned.

What is important for action is: THE DEFINITION OF THE SITUATION.

George Herbert Mead (1863-1931)

A pioneer in theorizing the SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF MEANING Mead argued that meaning is not ‘in’ an object; it comes out of a relationship between –

THE OBJECT WHAT IS DESIGNATED BY

THE OBJECT THE OBSERVER “An act is an ongoing event that

consists of stimulation and response and the results of the response.”

Symbolic Interactionism

Goffman regarded his own approach to SI as a ‘dramaturgical approach’: that is, that social life is like theater.

We all play roles (more on that, in a moment); we all ‘manage’ our impressions; we all have a ‘front stage’ and a ‘back stage’; we all make ‘excuses’ and ‘justifications’ for our actions.

Symbolic Interactionism

Charles H. Cooley (1864-1929) provided a major concept in symbolic interactionism: the idea of the ‘looking-glass self.’ With the ‘looking-glass self,’ the idea is that our own self-concepts are reflections of others’ ideas of us.

Symbolic Interactionism

The ‘looking- glass self’ would say that WE ARE (OR WE BECOME) WHAT OTHERS THINK WE ARE.

The sculptor Pygmalion and the statue who would become his wife.

If significant others interact with someone as if he or she were a certain kind of person with certain characteristics, then a sort of SELF-FULFILLING

PROPHECY may begin, so that the person takes on the same characteristics.

WHAT OTHERS THINK WE ARE IS COMMUNICATED PARTLY BY APPLYING LABELS TO US – so, our self-concept and actions can be

shaped by such societal labeling. This applies, too, to criminal and delinquent behavior.

Symbolic Interactionism

The theory would argue that application of stigmatizing labels such as ‘criminal,’ ‘junkie,’ ‘crazy person,’ ‘delinquent,’ etc. would serve as an INDEPENDENT variable that would foster criminal and delinquent behavior.

Symbolic Interactionism

Because of the effect of applied labels, symbolic interactionism would say that enforcing the law can have UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. Other theories may say this, but in SI it is a central idea.

Symbolic Interactionism

*Again: one of the main ideas – from symbolic interactionism, into LABELING THEORY -- is that the formation of a person’s identity is a reflection of others’ definitions of him or her. People who take on a DEVIANT SELF-IDENTITY become MORE, rather than less, deviant, because of the label. The unintended consequence: is that the label was supposed to prevent further problems, but instead THE PERSON BECOMES WHAT THE SANCTIONING PROCESS MEANT TO PREVENT.

Symbolic Interactionism

The self-concept is never a one-way process. Instead, the self-concept is formed and re-formed in an interactive process. A person self-reflects,

role-plays, and negotiates her/his identity.

Impression Management

People will try to MANAGE how others view them, as well as react to what others communicate about them.

‘Impression management’ presents a vision of a particular ‘self.’