Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Social constructionism and Labelling
A development in philosophy / sociological theory which became popular
after the 2nd World War esp in U.S.A.
(see Chicago School)
Rejection of ;
Positivism (and empiricism)
Structuralism
Determinism
Celebration of ;
The conscious individual.
The importance of meaning.
The social construction of reality.
The processes of interaction between individuals in the construction of
meaning.
“ Society consists of people responding to and negotiating over symbols”
“ If people define situations as real they are in their consequences”
In the Sociology of Deviance this represents a challenge to the dominant (
positivist ) paradigm which sees deviant behaviour as clearly defined,
measurable and determined;
1.Deviant Behaviour is caused / constrained by biological,psychological or
social structures.
2.Homogenous society with a collective conscience which clearly
distinguishes between;
‘normal’ and ‘deviant’
‘right’ from ‘wrong’.
3.Hence ‘deviants’ and ‘criminals’ are clearly identified as rule / law breakers.
Studies often restricted to convicted criminals.
4. Potential deviants / criminals are easily identified from the statistical data
e.g. the positive correlation between (lower) class position and crime.
2
The New Deviancy emphasised;
1. Deviants and criminals are rational individuals who make choices from the
cultural situations they find themselves in and the options available to them.
i.e their actions are meaningful.
2. Society is made up of a plurality of interests.To understand deviance we
have to adopt the standpoint of the deviant.
“ One man’s deviation may be anothers custom”
3. The inverse correlation between class and crime is a fiction crime occurs
at all levels of society its prosecution is unequal.
4. The operationalisation and measurement of deviance and crime is
problematic see especially the official crime stats.
“ The key argument is that human actions are best understood in terms of the
meaning that those actions have for actors, rather than in terms of preexisting
biological, psychological or social conditions. These meanings are to some
extent created by the individual, but primarily they are derived from intimate
personal interactions with other people. That is, people first construct
meanings in relation to situations they find themselves in, and then they act
toward those situations in ways that make sense within the context of their
meanings”
Vold, Bernard and Snipes (1998) p219
This has 2 major consequences;
3
1. The Construction and Application of Rules.
Behaviour takes place within a ‘rule governed’ environment.
Rules and Laws are socially constructed by people (‘moral entrepreneurs’)
and applied by people (‘legitimate labellers’).
Hence the construction of rules, their application and exemptions need to be
analysed;
i.In what conditions are rules applied?
ii.Who is subjected to a rule and who are the exemptions (and why?)
iii.How flexible is the rule?
iv.Who made the rule and whose interests does it serve?
v.What are the reactions to deviation from the rule?
"SOCIAL GROUPS CREATE DEVIANCE BY MAKING RULES WHOSE
INFRACTION CONSTITUTES DEVIANCE, AND BY APPLYING THOSE
RULES TO PARTICULAR PEOPLE AND LABELLING THEM AS
OUTSIDERS... THE DEVIANT IS ONE TO WHOMTHAT LABEL HAS
BEEN SUCCESSFULLY APPLIED; DEVIANT BEHAVIOUR IS
BEHAVIOUR PEOPLE SO LABEL”
BECKER
Deviance is not therefore a characteristic of the individual or their actions but
the social reaction their behaviour provokes.
see p 7 Unit 1
The application of the ‘deviant’ label is part of a process of definition.
4
2. The Impact of labelling upon the ‘self’.
Labelling theory is usually concerned with the application of negative labels
which encourage deviant behaviour.
“The application of a label to someone has significant consequences for how
that person is treated by others and perceives him/her self.”
(Moore)
These perceptions of self involve a process of
i) Expectation.
ii) Negotiation.
iii) Identification.
In this process labels are
i) created
ii) applied
iii) sustained
iv) internalised
But they may also be
vi)rejected
“It is one thing to commit a deviant acte.g. acts of lying, stealing,
homosexual intercourse, narcotics' use, drinking to excess, unfair
competition. It is quite another thing to be charged and invested with a
deviant character, i.e. to be socially defined as a liar, a thief, a homosexual,
a dope fiend, a drunk, a chiseler, a brownnoser, a hoodlum, a sneak, a
scab, and so on. It is to be assigned to a role, to a special type or category
of persons. The label the name of the role does more than signify one
who has committed suchandsuch a deviant act. Each label evokes a
characteristic imagery. It suggests someone who is normally or habitually
given to certain kinds of deviance; who may be expected to behave in this
way; who is literally a bundle of odious or sinister qualities. It activates
5
sentiments and calls out responses in others: rejection, contempt,
suspicion, withdrawal, fear, hatred.”
(Cohen 1966) see Unit 2 p 14
Deviance as a ‘career’ or ‘sequence’
Becker argues that a deviant act does not = Deviance.
Social control produces deviance through labelling. In response to this the
labelled enter upon a ‘career’ which involves a sequence of acts or events by
which they adopt a deviant identity.
Goffman refers to the deviant role as a ‘moral career’
e.g. In total Institutions ( Asylums) the ‘mortification of the self’ and the
‘inmate role’.
Lemert and the deviant self concept;
distinguishes between the initial stage of the deviant career ( Primary
Deviance) and the final stage of commitment to the deviant role
( Secondary Deviance ).
Matza distinguishes ‘formal’ (dominant) from ‘subterranean’(deviant) values
and argues that we ‘drift’ in and out of deviance.
6
Implications for the study of Crime & Deviance
1. The concepts “Deviance” and “Crime” are problematic.
2. Some people have the power to define.
see ‘legitimate labellers’ ‘moral entrepreneurs’ and ‘moral panics’.
3. Justice is ‘negotiable’.
4. The application of labels involves processes of interaction and
stigmatisation.
5. Internalisation of the label and the impact on the self concept.
‘moral career’
‘primary’ to ‘secondary’ deviance
‘rites of passage’ into ‘deviant sub culture’.
6. The ‘amplification’ of crime and the encouragement of ‘moral panics’ about
crime
7
Criticisms of ‘labelling theory’;
1. It is a perspective rather than a theory in that it does not explain deviant
behaviour but describes “the impact of labels” and “how criminals are
processed”.
2. Too deterministic; implies that criminal behaviour is an automatic
outcome of negative labels.
3. The sociology of the underdog.
Too sympathetic to the offender
selective use of less serious forms of deviance rather than
dangerous crime.
4. Overlooks the role of power and links to social structure in the defining of
crime and the labelling process.
see especially Marxist critics
These are a brief overview of the criticisms of the labelling perspective. For
a more detailed analysis see Plummer (1979) in Downes & Rock Deviant
Interpretations and Vold et al (1998)
8
Does the face fit the crime?
9
For each face identify the crime which that person committed (One crime per face)
Robbery Rape Car Theft Fraud Drug Gross
Dealing Indecenc
y
Face A
Face B
Face C
10