SOCIOLOGY TOPIC 2

?
Overview of labelling theorists on crime?
Interested on how & why certain acts come to be defined/labelled as criminal to start with. Argue no act is criminal/deviant in itself, only comes to be so when other label it. Not nature of act, but society's reaction to it
1 of 26
Becker on crime?
Deviant is someone whom the label has been successfully applied, & deviant behaviour simply that people label. Moral entrepreneurs=people who lead moral crusade to change law in favour of those to whom its applied
2 of 26
2 effects the new law has?
1.Creation of new group of 'outsiders'-outlaws/deviants who break new rule 2.Creation/expansion of social control agency to enforce rule & impose labels
3 of 26
Platt on juvenile delinquency?
Originally created as result of campaign by u/c victorian moral entrepreneurs to protect young at risk. Made juveniles separate category of offender with own courts, allowed state to extend powers beyond criminal offences to 'status offences'=truancy
4 of 26
Becker on social control agencies?
Argue they may campaign for law changes to increase own power EG. Federal Bureau of Narcotics passed marijuana tax to outlaw it. On grounds of ill effects on young but really to extend Bureaus influence
5 of 26
3 factors that contribute to arrest, charges & convictions?
1.Interactions with agencies of social control=police & courts 2.Appearance, background & personal biography 3.Situation & circumstances of offence
6 of 26
Piliavin & Briar?
Found police decisions to arrest youths were on physical cues=manner/dress where they judged. Influenced by class/gender/ethnicity & time/place. Those stopped at night in high crime areas more likely. Study of ASBO's found more ethnic minorities
7 of 26
Cicourel - Negotiation of justice?
Found officers 'typifications' led them to concentrate on certain types. Resulted in law showing class bias where w/c fitted police typifications more. Led more policing in these areas = more arrests confirming stereotypes
8 of 26
Cicourel on more bias?
Probation officers held common sense theory that juvenile delinquency was by broken homes/poverty/bad parenting. Saw youths from these as future offenders. M/C arrests less likely to be charged as background didnt fit police typification/parents
9 of 26
Topic v Resource?
Cocourel argues off crime stats give invalid picture of patterns of crime & cant be used as resource. Instead should be treated as topic to investigate. Mustn't take crime stats at face value. Will shed light on activities of control agencies
10 of 26
Lemert on primary deviance?
Deviant acts that havent been publicly labelled. Pointless to seek causes as so widespread its unlikey to have single cause & is trivial EG fare dodging & goes uncaught. Not organised deviance so can rationalise as 'moment of madness'
11 of 26
Lemert on secondary deviance?
Result of societal reaction - of labelling. Caught & publicly labelled as criminal. Involves being stigmatised, shamed from normal society. Becomes master status. Can provoke crises for individuals self concept of identity = self fulfilling prophecy
12 of 26
Jock Young on Notting Hill?
Study of hippy Marijuana users in Notting Hill. Drugs originally peripheral to hippies lifestlye = primary deviance. Persecution & labelling by control culture led them to see themselves as outsiders. Retreated & developed deviant subculture
13 of 26
Downes & Rock on labelling?
Although deviant career is common outcome of labelling its not always inevitable. Cant predict whether someone who's been labelled will follow deviant career as they're free to choose not to deviate further
14 of 26
Deviance Amplification?
Process where attempt to control deviance leads to increase in level of deviance. Leads to greater control & produces more & more deviance
15 of 26
Cohen on deviance amplification?
Folk devils/moral panics, study of societal reaction to mods & rockers. Press exaggeration/distorted reporting created moral panic & moral entrepreneurs calling for crackdown. Police arrested more youths/courts harsher penalties. Upward spiral
16 of 26
Evaluation of deviance amplification?
Similar to Lemert's idea of secondary deviance. Societal reaction to initial deviant act leads not to successful control but more deviance, more reaction etc. Shows important difference between labelling theory & functionalist theory of deviance amp
17 of 26
Lemert's evaluation of functionalist theories of deviance?
They rest heavily on idea that deviance leads to social control. Believe the reverse idea EG. Social control leads to deviance, is equally tenable & potentially richer premise for studying deviants in modern society
18 of 26
Labelling & criminal justice policy?
Triplett - increasing tendency to see young offenders as evil & to be less tolerant of minor deviance. Criminal justice system re-labelled status offences like truancy as more serious. Like Lemert's secondary deviance, resulted in increased offending
19 of 26
Policy implications of labelling?
Negative labelling pushes offenders towards deviant career. To reduce deviance, should make & enforce fewer rules for people to break EG Decriminalising soft drugs may reduce people with criminal convictions & therefore secondary deviance
20 of 26
John Braithwaite on labelling?
Identifies positive role for labelling. 2 types of shaming: 1.Disintergrative shaming = not only the crim but the criminal is labelled as bad/excluded 2.Reintegrative shaming = labels act but not actor, bad thing but not bad person
21 of 26
Reintegrative shaming?
Avoids stigmatising offender as evil & encourages others to forgive/accept them back in society. Makes it easier for both offender & community to separate offender from offence. Avoids pushing them into secondary deviance = lower crime rates
22 of 26
Evaluation of labelling theory?
Shows law isnt fixed set of rules but something whose construction needs explaining. Shows law often enforces in discriminatory ways & crime stats are record of activities of control agents not of criminals. Shows backfire of controlling deviance
23 of 26
2 criticisms of labelling theory?
1.Too deterministic, implying once labelled deviant career is inevitable 2.Emphasis on negative effects of labelling, gives offender victim status, ignores real victims
24 of 26
2 more criticisms of labelling theory?
1.Assumes offenders are passive victims of labelling, ignore they may choose deviance 2.Fails to explain why people commit primary deviance, before labelled
25 of 26
Marxists criticisms of labelling theory?
Argue fails to examine links between labelling process & capitalism. As result focuses on 'middle range officials' rather than capitalist class who make rules in 1st place. Fails to explain origin of label or why applied to groups like w/c
26 of 26

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Deviant is someone whom the label has been successfully applied, & deviant behaviour simply that people label. Moral entrepreneurs=people who lead moral crusade to change law in favour of those to whom its applied

Back

Becker on crime?

Card 3

Front

1.Creation of new group of 'outsiders'-outlaws/deviants who break new rule 2.Creation/expansion of social control agency to enforce rule & impose labels

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Originally created as result of campaign by u/c victorian moral entrepreneurs to protect young at risk. Made juveniles separate category of offender with own courts, allowed state to extend powers beyond criminal offences to 'status offences'=truancy

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

Argue they may campaign for law changes to increase own power EG. Federal Bureau of Narcotics passed marijuana tax to outlaw it. On grounds of ill effects on young but really to extend Bureaus influence

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Sociology resources:

See all Sociology resources »