The Theories Of The 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 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

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

Labeling theorists explore how and why certain acts are defined as criminal or deviant and why other such acts are not. As such, they also who is identified as a criminal, and who is not. They question how and why certain people become defined as criminal or deviant. Such theorists view criminals not as evil people who engage in wrong acts but as individuals who have a criminal status forced upon them by both the criminal justice system and the community at large. From this point of view, criminal acts themselves are not significant; it is the reactions of the rest of society to acts defined as criminal that are most crucial. Crime and its control involve a process of social definition, which involves a response from others to an

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

The notion of labelling theory was first created in the 1960s and gained popularity towards the late 1960s and early 1970s. The term was first applied “mentally ill” in 1966 when Thomas Scheff published his article Being Mentally Ill. Labelling theory explains a great importance in respect to drug use. Although labelling theory does not fully explain why initial drug use occurs, it does detail the process by which many people find themselves as socially deviant from others (Glen R. Hanson, University of Utah Salt Lake City Utah Glen R Hanson, Peter J. Venturelli, Annette E. Fleckenstein). The term deviance is used in a manner to describe an absence of the patterns of behaviour expected in a society and not in a judgemental way. Labelling theory

Labelling perspectives and its theorists focus on individuals who have been deemed as criminals and labeled by society (Tannenbaum, 1938, p. 20). Frank Tannenbaum (1938) has been widely regarded as the first labelling theorist, believing that criminal behaviour is learnt through individuals interacting within communities where crime was prevalent (Lee, Menard & Bouffard, 2014, p. 4). Tannenbaum believed when an individual had been

For the interduction Francis T. Cullen, Robert Agnew, and Pamela Wilcox (253) do is introduce Labeling Theory in the chapter of Labeling, Interaction, Crime: Societal Reaction and the Creation of Criminals. The three go on to discuss the creation of criminals from secondary deviance (253). After discussing secondary deviance, they begin to inform us about the rise and fall of Labeling Theory (Cullen, Agnew, and Wilcox). Next Cullen, Agnew, and Wilcox (256) begin to explain some new contemporary theories. Finally they discuss how Labeling Theory could affect policy. In the second part of this chapter Edwin M. Lemert (263) discusses primary and secondary deviance. The first thing Lemert (264) talks about is types of deviance. He goes on to explain

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

According to labeling theory, “formal criminal intervention should affect the individual’s social stigma. In many cases, the stigma of the criminal may increase the status and the probability that the individual becomes involved in deviant social groups. The formal label may thus ultimately increase involvement in subsequent deviance.” (Bernburg, Krohn, and Rivera 2006). “The classic labeling theory argues that formal societal reaction to crime can be a stepping stone in the development of a criminal career” (Becker 1963; Lemert 1967; Tannenbaum 1938). Researchers have suggested several different theories

In the years following Social Pathology, Lemert argues for the decriminalization of victimless crimes, advocates pre-trial diversion programs, and has backed away labeling determinism (Wright 1984). Howard Becker developed his theory of labeling (also known as social reaction theory) in the 1963 book Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Becker's theory evolved during a period of social and political power struggle that was amplified within the world of the college campus (Pfohl 1994). Liberal political movements were embraced by many of the college students and faculty in America (Pfohl 1994). Howard Becker harnessed this

The labeling theory proposes that once a juvenile has been labeled a deviant or delinquent they become stigmatized as a criminal, and begin to believe the label or accept it in a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because of these labels, many juveniles continue with their deviant acts because they feel obligated to act out in a negative manner. Sociologists Tannenbaum, Becker, Lement are more interested in the reaction to the crime, not the cause of the crime, and have theorized that once an individual is formally labeled or tagged by the criminal justice system they will develop a negative self-concept that makes them self-conscious and conscious of societal reactions, which encourage the individual into future deviance. Although the

Many laws are enforced to maintain crimes and protect individuals from violent deviant behaviors. Deviance is conducted based on interactions between individuals and groups. The labeling theory mentions social behavior where individuals stay deviant to maintain identity or label. Thio, Taylor, and Schwartz state “the word interaction deviance is a human activity involving more than one person’s act” (Thio, et. al, 2013, p. 35). The theory suggests individuals to reflect on their behaviors and how others view them. The labeling theory could be linked to the symbolic interaction foundation perspective. Understanding deviance and criminal behavior is approached through the labeling theory. The deviant act begins with the hypothesis that no act is essentially criminal. Criminality is recognized by individuals who feel powerful through the design of laws and the interpretation of law enforcement. Deviance is handled by the interaction between deviant and nondeviant actions and how the criminality is interpreted. Individuals, who represent force of law or order, could offer the main source of labeling. For example; this could include police, courts, or school authorities. Labeling individuals and understanding deviance hypothesis specific people who reinforce power based on class level and demands are likely to bypass committed crimes. Defining specific deviance and comprehending deviant behaviors labels privileged deviance as wealthy individuals, by men

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