Agnew, And Wilcox's Labeling Theory

The labelling theory shows how crime is socially constructed based on labels created by the powerful, which is important for our understanding of who commits a crime as they show how the powerless can be labelled as deviant whilst powerful groups are not. This undermines the

The labeling theory, an example of constructivist perspective is the theory put forth to define how deviance is experienced and why people continue to be deviant. The labeling theory was developed by a group of sociologists in the 1960’s. It is a version of symbolic interactionism defining deviance as a collective action involving the acts of more than one person, and the

Braithwaite’s reintegrative shaming theory draws on traditional criminological theories such as labelling, subcultural, opportunity, control, differential association and social learning theories (Braithwaite, 1989). John Braithwaite first put forward his theory of reintegrative shaming in his book, Crime, Shame

Under Edwin Lemert’s labeling theory the individual facilitates and impact’s their label. The process starts with deviation, sanctions for those behaviors by others, decision from the individual to imbed the label or challenge it, the individual then gets more reaction for their action from other and finally the individual chooses to accept the label and consistently acts within it. Primary deviance takes place when the individual engages in the initial act of defiance. In Lemert’s term, such acts under traditional labeling theory are examples of primary deviance and they occur in wide segments of the population. We all transgress now and then: some youth shoplift, others commit vandalism, and still others use illegal drugs. But suppose a youth, say a 15 year-old male, is caught vandalizing or using an illegal drug, His arrest, fingerprinting, and other legal measures make him think of himself as a young criminal. Parents, friends,

Labeling theory makes no attempt to understand why an individual initially engaged in primary deviance and committed a crime before they were labeled; this then limits the scope of the theory’s explanations and suggests the theory may not provide a better account for crime. Labeling theory emphasizes the negative effects of labeling, which gives the offender a victim status. Also, the same likelihood exists for developing a criminal career regardless of deviance being primary or secondary. Furthermore, labeling theorists are only interested in understanding the aftermath of an individual getting caught committing crime and society attaching a label to the offender. This differs from the view of social learning theory, which seeks to explain the first and subsequent criminal acts. Many critics also argue that the racial, social, and economic statuses of an individual create labels, as opposed to criminal acts; this theory then fails to acknowledge that those statuses may factor into the labeling process. As a result, the above suggests that labeling theory does not provide a good account for crime and appropriately has little empirical support. Moreover, in terms of policy implications, labeling theory implies a policy of radical non-intervention, where minor offenses

Using material from Item A and elsewhere assess the view that crime and deviance are the product of labelling processes.

When we hear shaming our minds quickly go to someone being embarrassed and humanized for their past actions. In public view for people to create judgments and uncertainty about a behavior seen from a certain person. This description falls under the common form of shaming known as stigmatization, found in our criminal system stigmatization is disrespectful shaming, “where the offender is treated as a bad person. The offender is left with that stigma permanently” (Braithwaite, 2000, 282) due to the forgivingness found in this form of shaming. Stigmatization shaming only tends to bring more shame than a resolution so crime tends to increase the crimes because the offender feels like there no way out, so I might as well

Because of the stigma created from the label a modification of self image occurs in the individual. The individual essentially lives up to their deviant label, becoming the person described in the label. The process of deviancy amplification whereby any punishments or treatment therefore reinforce the individual perception of the criminal, thus more crimes fitting to the label are carried out. This theory can however by criticised because it is determinist, where individuals have n control over the process and once they have been labelled they will inevitably turn

Becker who was identified with labeling; he was a Chicago School student during the early 1940’s-50. He wrote two books on deviance, the “Outsiders” and “The Other Side”. He put deviant behavior into four different groups, the conformity, pure deviant, secret deviant, and the falsely accused. During this time, the self-report methodology also developed which was when the juveniles were able to report their own delinquent behavior on their own time. Which was a new way to know about different criminal/delinquent behavior. The author also discussed the two different versions of labeling theory that was the societal reaction and the secondary deviance. The societal reactions is how labels are applied, and whom labels apply to and how labels affect opportunities for those labeled. The secondary deviance is what the label means to the person its being label on and how the labels create further deviant behavior. Crime was defined as “social constructions”, which means that an individual may break a rule but it is not crime until society labels it as such. I feel that those who react to behavior attribute deviance. If society label a personal as deviant than they are left, looking for evidence to support their belief, which I do not believe, is

Classical theory of labeling suggests that formal societal reaction to crime can be the cause of the development of one’s criminal career; however, modern theorists have predicted that several different processes cause the involvement of offenders in crime and deviance to increase. [1] Base on these theories, in recent years, the procedural and restorative justice approaches have been working on demolishing the stigma associated with offenders. Procedural justice is the process of making and implementing fair decisions, so parties involved in the matter can feel affirmed with the outcomes, [2] while Restorative justice is a

When an individual begins to commit crimes because of the label that was attached to them by society, it becomes known as secondary deviance. A possible explanation for this is that the individual has fully integrated the label into their master status and starts to commit crimes because they feel that is what they are expected to do. One of the individuals who have contributed much knowledge regarding labeling theory noted that acts which are not visible to the public have a greater chance of occurring but not having a label attached to the deviant individual and this would include acts such as sexual deviation (Higgens and Marcum, 2016). The inverse of the previous thought can also hold true as acts committed that have high social visibility are going to be noticed more by members of society and there becomes a higher chance for a label to be affixed.

The fourth article that I reviewed, focused on labeling theory. In this article, Labeling Effects of First Juvenile Arrests authors Liberman, Kirk, and Kim focused on how the first arrest increases the likelihood of reoffending for juveniles. The idea of labels triggers “secondary sanctioning” processes. Labeling is a powerful mechanism that can lead to crime.

In trying to understand crime and societies impact on the individual criminal, we can look towards many theories. The labeling theory, which society can share the blame for as well, categorizes criminals who are simply filling their role. It is applied to a specific class of people to include criminal, felons and juvenile delinquents (Schmalleger, 2016). Once the individual has become labeled, they consciously or subconsciously fulfill the roll they were given. Compounding the individual’s obstacles are the legal tags they also become associated with. The effects of tagging an individual begin at the local community level and can be seen throughout the criminal justice system (Schmalleger, 2016). In example, assume a young male is arrested

The major premise of the social reaction theory is that people play a major role when it comes to a person becoming and staying a criminal (Seigal & Welsh, 2015). Social reaction theory showcases the effects of how people and the environment increase criminality (Seigal & Welsh, 2015). Labeling children as “at risk” or “delinquent” increases the chances of them becoming involved in delinquent behavior (Seigal & Welsh, 2015). Since the way people perceive them is usually the way they will end up seeing themselves (Seigal & Welsh,

“Labeling theory is based on the idea that behaviors are deviant only when society labels them as deviant” (Crossman). The effect of being labeled as deviant can have two results, where some people change their ways of behavior while others get more involved into deviant acts. For example, when a coach is dealing with an athlete who is labeled as a “failure” by other athletes, the coach will not be surprised when the athlete does badly on a match. Indeed, the coach will be surprised if the athlete does well. Once a person is labeled as deviant, then the label stays with their identity for the rest of their