For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222
Call 1-800-351-0222
LABELING THEORY.
Term Paper ID:30847
Essay Subject:
Overview of the theory.... More...
12 Pages / 2700 Words
5 sources, 40 Citations,
APA Format
$48.00
More Papers on This Topic
Paper Abstract:
Overview of the theory. Examines effects of labeling on secondary deviance. Specific linkages between labeling and rule-making as a means of defining behavior, and the creation of secondary deviance. Difference between primary and secondary deviance. Secondary deviance as an outcome of societal response to a set of deviant behaviors. Problems of labeling perspective.
Paper Introduction:
Labeling and Secondary Deviance
Introduction
Deviance is very much a product of social rulemaking, rule enforcement, and policies regarding the consequence of enforcement (Goode, 2001). Though many theories of what causes deviance have been developed, this report will examine the labeling or interactionist theory of deviance which Goode (2001) describes as focused on rulemaking and, most particularly, reactions to rule-breaking. The goal of the study is to examine the effects of labeling on secondary deviance.
The report will first provide an overview of labeling theory. It will then discuss the nature and sources of secondary deviance. The report will then examine the specific linkages between labeling as a means of defining behavior and
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
Lemert (2 2) contendsthat "when a person begins to employ his deviant behavior or role based onit as a means of defense, attack, or adjustment to the overt and covertproblems created by the consequent societal reactions to him, his deviationis secondary" (p. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 51-53.Goode, E. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Lemert, E.M. Just as the poor student who is labeled as an "underachiever" andtreated as such by his or her teachers is unlikely to suddenly become anacademic overachiever, so too is the deviant or offender vulnerable tofurther acts of deviance or offenses. Although social reaction may become a crucial factor in shaping andreinforcing behavior, these effects are not consistent. Thereis usually, says Lemert (2 2), a compounding of the societal reaction outof the minute accretions in the deviant behavior. Still others may engage in behaviors labeled as deviant due to massiveemotional stresses such as the loss of a loved one. The convicted felon is widely recognized as having limitedopportunities upon release from prison to obtain employment or to beregarded without reference to his or her criminal offenses. Lemert (2 2) provided a summary of the sequence of interactionleading to secondary deviation. The social selfunderstands itself in relationship to others in the world. (2 2). This can have theeffect of stigmatizing deviant conduct as a reaction or reflex to thestigmatizing and the attendant penalties. The labeling perspective deals with two fundamental problemsidentified by McCaghy, Capron, and Jamieson (2 ): the social productionof deviance and the effect of labeling on behavior. Deviant Behavior: Crime, Conflict, and Interest Groups. The concept of reflexivity refers to looking at the self in partthrough the eyes of others. However, labeling theory does offer a logical explanation of howsecondary deviance can be perpetuated as a consequence of societal oraudience reaction to primary deviance. Furtherdeviations, perhaps with hostilities and resentment beginning to focus uponthose actors who do the penalizing may then occur. Deviant Behavior. 118). He may develop symbolic appurtenances of the new role manifested inclothing, speech, posture, and mannerisms (Lemert, 2 2). Audiences decide what is and isnot deviant and how it will be addressed by society. It achieveswhat Cooley (2 2) calls a sense of "I" that is based in large measure onthe ways in which others look at the self. The reportwill then examine the specific linkages between labeling as a means ofdefining behavior and the creation of secondary deviance. Deviance is therefore not a way of behaving, but aname or label that is put on something. The alcoholic, for example, may continue to find that he orshe is excluded from social events at which alcohol will be served evenafter having become "clean and sober" and begun to recover from his or heralcoholism. The looking glass self is a concept thatrecognizes that being stigmatized by others can indirectly or directly leadone to accept the stigma imposed externally. First, primary deviation occurs. Primary and second deviation. Lemert (2 2) argued that inthe absence of such audience reactions (which reifnroce a negative self-definition and the adoption of a self-perception of being deviant) it isquestionable whether any transition to secondary deviance would take place. (2 ). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Pontell, H.N. McCaghy, et al (2 ) arguethat labeling theory tends to minimize the importance of explaining initialor primary deviance and therefore ignores the meaning the behaviororiginally had for the deviant and its contribution to subsequent behavior. In many jurisdictions, the effort to overcome the association betweenlabeling and secondary deviance in the case of juvenile offenders takes theform of station-house community adjustments rather than court proceedings.Young offenders are diverted from the criminal justice system and thejuvenile justice system in order to prevent the transition to secondarydeviance (McCaghy, et al, 2 ). As McCaghy, et al (2 ) have pointedout, "power relationships, rule-making processes, and labeling patterns bypolice, courts, and other agencies are all aspects of the production ofdeviance" (p. Its central message was that individualswho are condemned, ridiculed, and even arrested and imprisoned, should notbe the primary focus of attention. It is also important to recognize that not allforms of labeling create the potential for secondary deviance. Today,largely as a consequence of changing social norms and the activistorientation of gays, lesbians, and others, homosexuality in the UnitedStates is less likely to be labeled as deviant and rarely countered bycriminal sanctions. Some deviants are fully and totally uninvolvedin any effort to characterize their actions as wrong or as demandingpunishment. Finally, the individual may havean ultimate acceptance of deviant social status and make efforts to adjuston the basis of the associated or attributed role. The individual who engages in an act of primarydeviance is therefore characterized as a passive and responsive individualwho is pushed into further deviance because of labeling. As noted above, laws do change, leading to great fluxin the definition of deviance and in the application of sanctions andpenalties focused on deviance. It has been argued that "social groups create devianceby making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applyingthose rules to particular people and labeling them outsiders" (McCaghy, etal, 2 , p. 86). What is criminal or deviant therefore depends upon whatpowerful groups decide is threatening or criminal. Socialpenalties may be imposed upon the individual. Itwill then discuss the nature and sources of secondary deviance. By labeling or stigmatizing certain behaviors as deviant, thesocial self as understood by Charles Horton Cooley (2 2) draws anunderstanding of itself from the communicative life. Deviance is therefore not a property inherent in certainbehaviors, but is rather a property that is conferred upon those specificforms of behavior by the audiences which witness them. 5 ). An inner world of deviance isproposed by labeling theory in that labeling theorists consider itimportant to understand the internalized responses of an individual tohaving been labeled as a deviant or stigmatized (Goode, 2 1). For example, somepeople may in fact steal because they are hungry and have no money to buyfood. Though the theory may well havelimits and may not comprehensively identify the causes of the primarydeviance, it does demonstrate the influence of society and audiences on thebehaviors of individuals who are stigmatized, stereotyped, and labeled. Labeling theory challenges us to recognize that deviance may befostered not by any particular predisposition toward certain kinds ofbehavior, but rather by society's response to a primary set of deviantactivities (Goode, 2 1). The social self. Labeling theory emphasizes the production of rules via socialdefinitions. Pontell (Ed.) Social Deviance: Readings in Theory and Research. Secondary deviance occurs, according to Pontell (2 ), "when the personenacting the deviant behavior organizes his or her identity around thesereactions by others" (p. This has certainly occurred in some instances. Pontell (Ed.) Social Deviance: Readings in Theory and Research. Generally, thetransition from primary deviance to secondary deviance takes place becauseof the reactions of the audience that observes and comments upon theprimary deviance exhibited by the individual. Thus, the very act oflabeling creates a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the individualperceives himself or herself to have been found wanting and therefore theindividual continues to act in such a way as to demonstrate that he or sheis deserving of this label (McCaghy, et al, 2 ). In other words, even though youthful offenders may commit actsof primary deviance that are harmful or damaging to society, it does notnecessarily follow that they will commit secondary acts of deviance. If this processcontinues, a point is reached where in-grouping and out-grouping betweenlarger societal units and the deviant becomes manifest. This presents arelativistic approach to deviance because it assumes that the making andenforcement of rules in society are both inconsistent and problematic(McCaghy, et al, 2 ). As a result, their violations are not stigmatized and can beignored by labeling theorists (McCaghy, et al, 2 ). At one time,homosexuality was considered to be both deviant and a crime. It is possible to distinguish between rule-breaking behavior anddeviant behavior. Secondary deviance, therefore, is not inevitable (McCaghy, et al,2 ). Though many theories of what causes deviance have been developed,this report will examine the labeling or interactionist theory of deviancewhich Goode (2 1) describes as focused on rulemaking and, mostparticularly, reactions to rule-breaking. McCaghy, et al (2 ) make reference to work by Lemert on juveniledelinquency and asserted that by diverting juveniles out of the justicesystem and by refraining from labeling them as deviant, it is possible toinhibit the emergence of secondary, career type delinquents or adultoffenders. According to Pontell (2 2), Lemert argued that the primary causes ofdeviance were less significant than the reactions of others to suchbehaviors. 87).Secondary Deviance Lemert (2 2) differentiated between primary and secondary deviation. For someindividuals, a primary deviance countered by a negative reaction from animportant audience can lead to an avoidance of the negatively labeledbehaviors. In the not so distant past it was illegal to have orto perform an abortion, but the law in the United States was changed tomake abortion legal for both the recipient and the provider. The thrust of this suggestion is that secondarydeviance is not necessarily an inescapable consequence of primary deviance. When an audiencelabels an activity deviant, it then labels a specific individual as adeviant and exerts a stigmatizing effect (Goode, 2 1). Labeling theory was influenced heavily by thewritings of Edwin Lemert and involves a social-psychological perspective ondeviance (Pontell, 2 2). Others may become violent because they have abused alcohol or drugs. Primary deviance is conceptualized as the violation of norms stemming fromoriginal causes. Who will be criminal ordeviant is a matter of decision-making by the persons and agenciesresponsible for enforcing rules. Labeling theory posits an essentially reactive view ofdeviance wherein audience responses are viewed as equal in significance tothe behavior itself. As Goode (2 1) puts it, "deviantlabels tend to be 'sticky;' the community tends to stereotype someone as,above all and most importantly, a deviant" (p. The implication is that theproblem of deviance - or at least of certain kinds of deviance - wouldsimply disappear if society as a whole accepted a wider range ofunconventional behavior. The question of whether labeling theory is fully adequate to explainsecondary deviance has also been discussed. 55). (2 1). Should the primary deviance continue unabated and precipitate anadverse reaction from others, it is possible that it could eventually beattributed not to an original cause, but to new problems created by theunfavorable reactions it engenders in an audience (McCaghy, et al, 2 ).At this juncture, the deviance becomes secondary. Labeling and Secondary DevianceIntroduction Deviance is very much a product of social rulemaking, ruleenforcement, and policies regarding the consequence of enforcement (Goode,2 1). Labeling theory can be traced back to the conceptsof Durkheim who argued that the criminal character of acts was due not tothe intrinsic quality of a given act but to the definition which thecollective conscience applies to the act (McCaghy, et al, 2 ). These twoexamples serve to reinforce the validity of labeling theory. Another problem with any emphasis on secondary deviance is thatresearch has been directed away from the deviance of those powerful groupsor individuals who can resist societal reaction. Social Deviance: Readings in Theory and Research. Secondarydeviance therefore becomes all too commonplace. ReferencesCooley, C.H. (2 2). It should be noted that secondary deviance was never intended to be ageneral theory of delinquency or criminality causation, but rather wasintroduced as an explanation of how casual or random deviance can becomeredefined and stabilized (McCaghy, et al, 2 ).Labeling and Its Effects on Secondary Deviance Goode (2 1) clailms that when labeling theory was first formulatedin the 196 s it was very radical. Further primary deviationmay then emerge, countered by stronger penalties and rejection. In H.N. These primary types ofdeviance may have few negative consequences as long as the deviance can betolerated and incorporated into an otherwise non-deviant image (McCaghy, etal, 2 ). These causes can be one of a number of social,situational, physiological, and psychological factors. This tends toignore the fact that there are many deviants who refuse to obfuscate whatthey are and what they do. Lemert (2 2) warned against the application of stigmatizing labels,particularly in the case of juveniles who are extremely vulnerable to theself-fulfilling prophecy. Goode (2 1) believes that the labeling approach seems to extend ahand of tolerance and acceptance to all types of devalued activities - someof which can be harmful to innocent victims. The central points of labeling theory described by Goode (2 1)include the necessity of audiences that generate the labeling process, thenature of labeling and stigmas, reflexivity or the response to labeling,the so-called inner world of deviance, the "stickiness" of labels, and theself-fulfilling prophecy (Goode, 2 1). Rules in society fluctuate over time and are often applied to widelyvarying degrees within society (Goode, 2 1). A limited numberof sources will be employed to argue that labeling directly fosterssecondary deviance because the individual who enacts deviant behavior maybe dealing with the problems created by social reactions to his or herprimary deviations (Goode, 2 1).Labeling Theory Labeling theory, also known as the interactionist approach todeviance, does not focus on the causes of deviance as such, but rather onhow certain behaviors are labeled as deviant in the first place and theways in which such designations or labels influence future behavior(Pontell, 2 2). (Ed.) (2 2). Goode (2 1) maintains that many conforming members of society areextremely reluctant to accept a labeled deviant on an entirely equalfooting. More often than not there is a progressive reciprocal relationshipbetween the deviation of the individual and the societal reaction. The focus is on thosewho define persons and their behavior and not on violations of commonlyaccepted norms or the assumption that offenders must be different in waysthat cause deviance. Because law is subject to changeover time, it is important to recognize that there may be somethingarbitrary in certain laws and penalties or sanctions (thoug not necessarilyin all laws). It is here thatthe application of a label or a stereotype takes the form ofstigmatization. A third problem with the labeling perspective is that it tends toignore or at least to diminish the fact that individual actors are capableof either choice or resistance while the labeling process is taking place(McCaghy, et al, 2 ). In H.N. Upper Saddle Rive, NJ: Prentice Hall. Once a person has been labeled as deviant and has moved fromprimary to secondary deviance, a full reintegration into society can beproblematic. Labeling theory challenged socialscientists and policymakers alike to take a look at those groups withinsociety that frame and enforce the law. Finally, labels tend to be "sticky" in that once an individual hasbeen stigmatized and labeled as deviant, it is difficult at best toovercome the effects of the labeling. The report will first provide an overview of labeling theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 53-56.McCaghy, C.H., Capron, T.A., & Jamieson, J.D. A crisis can then bereached in terms of the tolerance quotient, expressed as formal action bythe community engaged in stigmatizing the deviant. Many wealthy or powerfulelites commit norm and law violations without prosecution and often withoutdetection. For example, at one timepossession of marijuana was legal in the United States though this is notthe case today and possession of marijuana can lead to the application ofcriminal sanctions. The goal of the study is toexamine the effects of labeling on secondary deviance.
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
We can write a Custom Essay just for you.
Browse Essays by Subject