Labeling Theory

Associating with the self-fulfilling prophecy, master status, and symbolic interactionism, Howard Becker’s labeling theory, views deviance as not an innate act, but rather, elects to target society impulse to engage in stigmatization (Cartwright, 2011). In this paper, I will discuss the implications of labeling specifically in the articles “The Saints and the Roughnecks” by William Chambliss and “On Being Sane In Insane Places” by David Rosenhan. Additionally, I will be discussing the far-reaching effects of negative labeling an individual, with respect to concepts such as labeling theory, the self-fulfilling prophecy, and master status.

Labeling theory states that a deviant behavior does not impact to themselves or the people who commit them, but by the reactions of other who comprehend these deviant behaviors, such as the deviant behavior of Justin Bieber.

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

Dalton Conley describes labeling theory in Chapter 6 of You May Ask Yourself as “the belief that individuals subconsciously notice how others see or label them, and their reactions to those labels over time form the basis of their self-identity” (Conley, 2011:203). In other words, over time, a person’s self-identity changes to fit the character other people impose upon them. An action itself isn’t necessarily deviant unless society decides it is. Labeling theory can go either way, either positive or negative.

Another aspect of constructing identity can be applied to the concept of deviance, symbolic interactionist refer to deviance using the labeling theory, which refers to the meanings that stem from labels, symbols, actions, and reactions that people have toward one another. This theory states that behaviors are only deviant if and when society labels them as deviant. This being the case, members of society that have conformed to what is considered non-deviant behavior, (normal behavior) then interpret behaviors that go against social norms as deviant and as such, attach the label of deviant onto those individuals (Hewitt, 2007). The concept of deviance fits right into the SCT because the individuals that are labeled deviant have in some way shape or form constructed the deviant identity that warrants such a label.

When this label is attached and internalized the individual’s actions will become influenced by the label and further deviance can be produced as a result as the individual is going to think that it is expected of them. It is also possible that when these labels are attached and internalized that these deviants will be pushed to the outskirts of society and it is here that they may begin to associate with others who may have similar

Once a person is labelled as a deviant, it is hard to remove that label. The Labeling Theory basically says that no behavior is deeply rooted on its own. It is society’s reaction to the behavior that makes the act deviant or not. Labeling is to give someone or something to a category and is usually given mistakenly. The people who usually doing the labeling have statues, numbers, power and authority. People with low status, power and authority are the ones that are being labeled.

Under labeling theory, criminal behavior is based on the state stamping the behavior as criminal, instead of criminal behavior being based on the harm that it causes. Thereafter, labels are influenced by society’s reactions. Lemert formulated this theory with emphasis on the importance of identity. He developed two types of deviance, primary and

Labeling theory holds that individuals come to identify and act as per their labels. The major tenet of this theory is that the behavior and self-identity of individuals is affected by the way they are described by other people (Vold, Bernard, Snipes, & Gerould, 2016). According to this theory, the act of deviance is not implicit in a particular act, but is hedged on the inclination of the majority to ascribe labels to minorities in society who deviate from standard behavior. Labeling leads to dramatization of a particular act – which propagates the behavioral clash between the individual and the community. Through ascribing labels, the individuals acquire a negative self-image. The individuals accept themselves as labeled by the

‘social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders. From this point of vie, deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of the rules and sanctions to an ‘offender’. The deviant is one to whom the label has successfully been applied, deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label. (Becker 1963, pg 9)

"Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders-deviance is not a quality of the act of a person commits, but rather a consequences of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an 'offender' The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied. Deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label."

Based on Howard Becker’s symbolic or labeling theory, all acts of deviance and the person seen to be acting in a deviant manner are given labels. These labels generally come from someone in there community or group who are in hierarchy or authority figure. That means no action is deviant unless specified by the particular community or group (Bessant & Watts 2002). Becker’s labeling theory concentrates on the lower class, and anything apart from what the group expects is labeled as deviant. The term Once a criminal always a criminal is familiar, it is these type of labels that maybe detrimental in terms of a person internalizing labels as truth, and how others sees them (D. Conley 2008). The labels and or judgments given negatively, isolate the person from the group, and may hinder the person’s opportunity to reach their full potential. The strains put on a person to conform to the particular cultures norms and values, does not allow any person to differ in nature or thought. When one is pressured to perform in ways that may be foreign or

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,

Schmalleger describes the labeling theory or social reaction theory as one that sees persistent criminal behavior as a result of not, having the chances for normal conduct that follow the negative responses of society to those that have been labeled as criminals. There is an expectation of a continuous increase in crime that is a direct effect of the label that is attached. The result of negative labels creates limited chances that the behavior would change on behalf of the criminal, due in part to societies stigma placed upon them (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 186). Those theorists responsible for the labeling theory that are discussed in our readings during this weeks assignments are listed as Frank Tannenbaum, Edwin M. Lemert, Howard Becker, John Braithwaite and others. When discussion the concept labeling, one must understand some of the most early descriptions of societal reactions to deviance, this can be found in the 1938 works of Frank Tannenbaum who explained the term, tagging. Schmalleger defined tagging as the process whereby an individual is negatively defined by the agencies of justice. Within tagging Edwin M. Limert, used the terminology of primary and secondary deviance, primary being a deviant act that was undertaken to achieve some immediate issue and or problem that may have arisen in the person life and doesn’t intend for the criminal behavior to continue. Secondary deviance

According to Howard Becker’s labeling theory, ‘deviance is not a quality of the act person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an “offender”.’ (Becker