Interactionist Theory of Crime and Deviance

HideShow resource information
  • Created by:
  • Created on: 07-06-13 21:00
View mindmap
  • Interactionist Theory of Crime and Deviance
    • Becker and Lemert - all of us commit a deviant act at some point but we still see those who get caught as different, this is because of labelling.
      • Box found that people in a jury had actually fiddled more money than a theft sent to jail for stealing money.
    • Lemert found that only one tribe in the Northern Pacific Coastal Indians which placed importance of speech making know what stuttering was while others didn't.
      • If a child showed any defect then parents would label them and cause them to stutter.
    • Beckar - there is no such thing as a deviant act, deviance is that which is labelled so.
      • Beckar uses the term master label to describe labels such as criminal that override all previous statuses.
        • These can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies.
    • Deviance is context specific, based on what Thomas calls "definition of the situation."
      • Mead sees that humans are constantly negotiating definitions of situations.
    • Young;s study of HIppy cannabis users showed that labelling of the drug users by the police actually increased their drug use.
    • Goffman suggests that the abnormal are labelled as deviant or subhuman as means of controlling or socially excluding them.
      • We all like to see ourse;ves as normals and tend to avoid, segregate and stereotype those regarded as different.
    • - Doesn't explain motivations of deviants and criminals.
    • - Blames labellers and portrays deviants as innocent victims.
    • - Doesn't explain why agents of social control act the way they do.
    • - Weakness in the concept of deviance, attempted to be strengthened Lemert (primary and secondary deviance.)


No comments have yet been made

Similar Sociology resources:

See all Sociology resources »See all Crime and deviance resources »