labelling theory on crime and deviance
- Created by: athinaP
- Created on: 11-05-16 18:07
View mindmap
- crime and deviance: labelling theory interactionist approach
- cicourel: the negotiation of justice
- agents of social control eg police hold typifications about who is more likely to commit crime.
- these are likely to be bias and target the more powerless groups e.g the young, poor and ethnic minorities.
- this is likely to lead to a self serving bias
- police more likely to patrol areas with higher concentrations of these people
- therefore more likely to arrest people from these groups
- leads to arrest rates reflecting their typifications about who commits these crimes
- therefore more likely to arrest people from these groups
- police more likely to patrol areas with higher concentrations of these people
- this is likely to lead to a self serving bias
- these are likely to be bias and target the more powerless groups e.g the young, poor and ethnic minorities.
- agents of social control eg police hold typifications about who is more likely to commit crime.
- evaluation
- disadvantages
- theory criticised for focusing too much on the labelling of the deviant and not the victims. their suffering isn't socially constructed
- realists argue interactionists too quickly dismiss official stats + ignore crime is a real problem
- Marxists say interactionists fail to see why crime is socially constructed the way it is. ignore origins of crime relating to inequality and power
- advantages
- labelling theory has empirical support from education+ psychiatry where it's been shown applying a label of deviance leads to more deviance
- disadvantages
- Becker:
- what's classed as crime or deviance is based on subjective decisions by moral entrepreneurs
- cicourel: the negotiation of justice
Comments
No comments have yet been made