The Effect Of The Labeling Theory

This paper will be ab analyze of Sanyika Shakur’s aka Monster Kody Scott’s life. First, I will explain the base of three theories: Lemert’s labeling theory, Miller’s Subcultural Focal Concerns, and Hirschi’s Social Control theory. I will then apply them to incidences with in Shakur’s life and elaborate on issues each theory has in application to his life. Lastly, I will come to the conclusion of which theory is best and possess the most utility and then discuss modifications to the others in order to improve their application.

The focus of this paper will be on two contemporary criminological theories and their application to the crime film, Eastern Promises. The two theories to be discussed, and subsequently applied to the film, are labelling theory and differential association theory. Labelling theory falls under the symbolic interactionist approach, and the primary level of analysis of this theory is micro, as it tends to focus on the effect of labels on an individual’s sense of “self”. The basis of labelling theory is that no act is inherently deviant; it is only when the act is labelled deviant that it becomes so. When someone is labelled as deviant, they begin to see themselves as the label they have been assigned. This can cause the behaviour to happen more frequently, as the individual who has been labelled begins to see themselves as they label they have been given. A criticism of labelling theory is that it lacks empirical validity, and is deterministic. There is no way to effectively test this theory, so there is no way to know for sure how accurate the concept of labelling is and the effect it has on an individual and their propensity towards criminality. This and other aspects of labelling theory will be broken down and discussed later on in the paper.

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

Some sociologists believe that the cause of crime and deviance is labelling which is when a label is attached to a person or group of people due to their appearance, sex, ethnicity etc. Labelling theory argues that once this label has been attached it can create a self fulfilling prophecy, which is when the person begins to act according to the label and hence it comes true simply through being made. Labelling is similar to stereotyping but this is when a person assigns certain characteristics to a labelled group. An example to support this would be 9/11. Since this disaster people label Muslims as being terrorists

The Labeling Theory is the view that labels people are given affect their own and others’ perception of them, thus channeling their behavior either into deviance or into conformity. Labels can be positive and/or negative, but I’ll focus on the negative aspects of labeling in high school. Everybody has a label in high school whether it is the “slut”, “pothead”, “freak” or the “jock”; it is one of the most apparent time periods in which individuals get labeled. Students have the mentality that whatever label is placed on them is going to be stuck with them forever, which then leads into a self-fulfilling prophecy. This, I feel, is a fear of being a “loser” that has been instilled throughout years by the principals, teachers, etc. An example

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.

When a person's social situation is changed, it may also change his or her self-image. His or her self-image is so affected by labeling that it becomes precisely the same as the identity imputed to him or her (Knutsson, 1977). A great example of this theory in effect can be seen in the movie the Stanford Prison Experiment. Zimbardo, the psychologist in charge of the experiment, hypothesized that inherent traits are what cause so much violence in prison settings. This goes back to the dispositional or situational argument, inherent traits being the general disposition or characteristics that a person was born with. To his surprise, the experiment did not give him the results he was expecting. Instead, he found that each group adapted to the stereotypical behaviors that go along with the identity that they have each been given. The “prison guards” did not take long to conform to the expected characteristics associated with being a prison guard which include enforcing strict rules, and punishing the prisoners with disciplines such as push ups, jumping jacks, or menial tasks such as cleaning the toilets with their bare hands, when they do not obey these rules. The labeling theory may have also resulted in deindividuation, especially with the guards. This is the state when one becomes so immersed in the norms of the group that one are put in, one loses their sense of identity. The guards may have been so sadistic because they did not feel what they did was down to them personally, but it was a group norm (McLeod, 2017). The prisoners, however, were also quick to conform to the deviant and criminal-like behaviors associated with being a prisoner. On the second day of the experiment a rebellion arose within the prisoners. As the prison guards came to wake up the prisoners for the 10 o’clock count, they were met with the

Minorities are targeted as criminal suspects by police officers because, more often than not, minories are likely to be poor, uneducated. Police base their assumption that minorities engaged in

The empirical status of labelling theory is something that has been highly debated since the creation of the theory in the 1960 and Kubrin, Stucky, and Krohn note that this theory may even be one of the hardest theories to test (2009). One of the main issues that make this theory hard to test is the fact that there is not an agreement on the conceptualization of the key concepts that make

One study reported that African-American males that were released into areas reporting these factors had a 10% higher-recidivism rate in the span of two years (Reisig, Bales, Hay, Wang, 2007). It can be reasonably stated that minorities trying to assimilate into society with these issues may have a larger setback to conquer, and thus fail to integrate as sufficiently as those without these challenges, such as Caucasians. Additionally, the article from Abate has shown that self-worth and stereotypes often combine to impact the actions of minorities, especially in regards to criminal action among youth (as cited in Cohen, Garcia, Apfel, & Master,

Labeling theory: The label theory tends to focus less on the reasoning behind a criminal committing crime, and tends to focus on why society has chosen to label them as deviant. Everyone who commits a crime doesn’t carry the deviant name badge, there is a process that happens. Depending on the crime and the individual who committed the crime, is when the labeling process begins. Unfortunately the label plays a dominant role when it comes to understanding the individual. For an example, when applying for a job, the application may include the individual’s prior conviction. In fact, many applications ask if you are a convicted felon please explain crime and sentence. The individual is now labeled as a felon because of his

The effect of labelling potential offenders and the causal relationship between label and offence is an enduring question for criminal sociologists (Cunneen 1995). The criminalisation of ethnic and immigrant minorities has been linked to the ‘Other’ or fear of a stranger and it is the internal justification for the use of asymmetrical responses when compared to non-minority crime (Collins & Reid 2009). The

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

When enough people agree that a certain idea is true then it "becomes" true and is understood as real. If one person commits a crime and is defined a criminal then society may react to that person as a criminal. This will require them to act as a criminal. If another person commits the same crime and society defines the behavior as a "mistake", They are not seen as a criminal and are not required to be a criminal in return.

Have you ever experienced a time when your parents called you a genius and you truly felt like one? How about when a professor pointed fingers at you because he thought you were cheating on a test? Most certainly you felt some type of shame or guilt; or probably got so tired of your colleagues negative thoughts that you decided to embrace it and just go along with it. These are just a few examples of the impact that people’s opinions or thoughts can have on your reputation. Think for a second about the Stanford Prison Experiment, which demonstrates the influential role that a situation can play in human behavior. The individuals chosen to perform as guards were placed in a position of power and thus they began