The Strengths Of Labelling Theory And Differential Association 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 basically categorize individuals who breaks the laws or commit crime. The purpose of the labeling is to cause social humiliation so the individual want commit the crime again. Labels are placed on individuals who commit crime to reduce repeat offenses. A person of prestige that has a high ranking social class is the individual that usually determines how labels are applied. Labeling theory can have a negative effect on the individual who is categorized, the individual is more likely to view them self as labeled. Therefore the individual may go through an identity crisis trying to find their true identity. Some theorist believed that the labeling theory is meant to prevent crime while others believe it encourages crime. When individual conforms to the social stigma he or she engages in deviant acts. Males are more likely to conform to the labels. The negative treatment from members within society can reduce an individual deviant behavior based on the fact that the individual does not want to be judge or mistreatment. This theory does not have a specific method to deter crime. However the form of punishment for the labeling theory is shaming the individual. Individuals who have a criminal label are often looked down on from members within society.it is hard for individual that has a criminal record to find a decent job. To rent a house one must complete a criminal background check. To attend school one must disclose their criminal history. An individual

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,

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

This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.

In the early 1800’s early European theorists started observing behaviors, interactions, and relationships between people and how they were affected by the industrial revolution. There were many theorists that were influenced by the social dynamics of the revolution including Auguste Comete, Andre Guerry, and Adolphe Quetelet. These theorist proposed important aspects that contributed to social structure theories including economic factors that influences crime. Separately, these theorists concluded that crime is not random and is caused by factors outside of one’s control. Emile Durkheim, a theorist who a very heavy influence on criminology had

Numerous aspects of the criminal justice policies are theoretical based labeling. An example is when a person got arrested for just a minor crime, or simple misdemeanor, or perhaps traffic charge; then the criminal justice labels the individual base on the infraction committed. Besides, the motive for labeling offender is just another way for the judicial system to track and control, explicitly incarcerated folks and lawbreaker who eventually get out in the public eye. Although some may argue that the concept of labeling individual is necessary to separate them from society, this idea singled them out and possibly perceived as impractical. Let me be clear,

‘Labelling theory is the view of deviance according to which being labelled as a “deviant” leads a person to engage in deviant behaviour.’ This states that if a person were to labelled as a thief, that person would be treated different (looked down upon). This could leave this person to do what they are labelled as and commit theft. This is backed up with study.com’s definition of labelling theory, which states ‘people become criminals when labelled as such and when they accept the label as personal identity’. This moves into strain theory as the strain theory cultural theory as in Merton’s strain theory argues that ‘the American cultural

Frank Tannenbaum (1938) is often recognized as the original mastermind behind labeling theory, as he developed the ideas of this concept throughout his book titled Crime and the Community (Bell, 2012). However, at the time, his theoretical model was known as the “dramatization of evil” rather than labeling theory. Tannenbaum rejected earlier positivist theories, which argued that delinquents were identifiably different from law-abiding citizens (Bell, 2012). He instead recognized that the underlying causes of delinquency are deeper than that which lies in the individual, and noted how society can in fact work to create the criminal. Tannenbaum held that delinquency operates at a group – as opposed to individual – level, in the sense that certain groups become drawn to conflict and then individuals come to adjust to the conflict group (Tannenbaum, 1938). The question, then, is how individuals find themselves drawn to delinquent groups and why the groups themselves are in conflict with wider society. According to Tannenbaum, the development of a

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

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

Labeling theorists suggest that labeling individuals as deviant has the potential of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy (Globokar, 2008). Howard Becker has described deviance as a “consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender’; the deviant is one to whom the label has successfully been applied; deviant behavior is behavior people so label” (Clinard & Meier, 2011:89). Culture, sex, age and other elements of identity all shape self-conception, but the meanings that an individual places on various circumstances and interactions certainly play a very important role as well.

Labeling theory helps us understand the social responses and reactions from the community, and as illustrated in the opening comments, the Mercer brothers’ history of criminal behavior and activities. Labeling theory is an approach of explaining that the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used when societies describe or classify individuals without further