Aaron V. Cicourel (1968), explains the treatment of delinquents in two similar Californian cities by using labelling theory. He claims that a difference in juvenile justice can be accounted for by different policies of the police, and by the ability of middle class parents to negotiate justice. He concludes by stating that some individuals are more likely than others to be labelled as deviant, due to their status in life. This theory was reinforced by E. M. Schur(1971), who discusses the drug addiction of many doctors, or the likelihood of bank tellers to misappropriate funds. Schur suggests that in both cases the actor has legitimate access to drugs or money, which gives them some protection against being discovered, as opposed to the case …show more content…
The conservative nature of labelling theory was also criticized, specifically by E. M. Schur. He suggested that although the sociology of the underdog is indispensable in the alleviation of the unnecessary suffering of the deviant individual, the labelling theorists are guilty of romanticizing certain non-political deviations and avoiding a truly radical critique of the social system as a whole (1971). However, one of the major criticisms of labelling theory is that it is deterministic. As a matter of fact, it specifically treats the individuals as if they were no more than passive organisms, herded into behaviour by the act of the labels being given to it. As well, further criticism is given due to the fact that, following behaviour patterns is the mere result of the behaviour patterns being ascribed to it. For instance, Herbert Blumer (1969) suggests that the human being is seen as an active organism in his own right, facing, dealing with, and acting toward the object he indicates. On the other hand, Alexander Liazos (1972) provides for three criticisms based on the work of labelling theorists. First of all, he notes that although a labelling theorists aim is to humanise the deviant individual and show that he or …show more content…
For example, the imputation of the label `insane` to a person may represent an important stage in the process of becoming mentally ill. Labelling theory has also been used to explain witchcraft. Nevertheless, the theory in its entirety has provided a beneficial development of the sociological understanding of self-conceptions, relationships between deviance, social reaction and social control. Furthermore, after thorough analysis it is evident that labelling theory has proven to be very significant in establishing a relative body of empirical research evidence on the study of crime and
Do you believe that a law should be made to make a restaurant place food nutritional information on all menus? In my stance of opinion a restaurant should not be made to post nutritional information. Food should be enjoyed the way it is, and not everyone would read the post, therefore, it would take up that space for no reason. People should be allowed to run their restaurants the way they want them, and no different. If you ordered a healthy meal the price would be higher than a regular meal.
..., Rossiter, K.R. and Verdun-Jones, S.N., 2011, ‘“Forensic” labelling: An empirical assessment of its effects on self-stigma for people with severe mental illness’, Psychiatry Research, vol. 188, no. 1, pp.115-122.
“Labeling theory,” which states that our self-identity and behavior can be altered by the names or terms that people use to describe or classify us. Labeling is using descriptive terms to categorize or classify something or someone. Sometimes these labels can have positive impacts on our life or as Amanat’s mentioned that these labels can limit our full potential to do anything by believing that people’s expectation about us is how we should define ourselves. In doing so, we act against our true nature because we’re trying to live up to others expectations or deny their assumptions.
To correctly apply the Labeling theory, we have to look at how the theory can give a positive and reinforcing label. The model can explain two major turning points for the brothers, first when the city supports them causing them to start killing. And second, when they have don...
Labelling theory: The theory that the terms crime, deviance, or punishment are labels, variously applied by act of power and not some natural reflection of events – American criminologist Howard Becker
The Modified Labelling Theory, created by Link et al., (1989) hypothesized that individuals who were labeled as mentally ill, would manage the stigma they faced through three coping mechanisms; education, withdrawal and secrecy (as cited in Ray & Brooks Dollar, 2014). The Modified Labelling Theory is a credible theory that has been used to approach not only the repercussions of stigma in mental illness, but also to explain behaviours of those who smoke, live with HIV/AIDS, or have a child with a disability (Ray & Brooks Dollar,
...cal theories learned this semester, such as, the labeling theory and social control theory, finding limitations within previous works is made possible. Although the conflicting forms of murder have similarities, it becomes clear, healthcare serial killers have gone undetected as a result of their misconstrued categorization. To resolve this problem, Lubaszka and Shon suggest future researchers assess healthcare serial killers with their recently developed findings in mind.
Labeling theory of deviance suggests that when one is labeled constantly on the basis of any minority it gives rise to deviant behavior in order to prove the strength of the minority. The minority has been labeled so by people for a long time. They have been labeled because of their race. The gang is labeled anti-social because of their criminal behavior which turns them further to deviance. The use of the labeling theory can be seen being implemented very judiciously
As mentioned in lecture, labeling theory asks two critical questions: what is crime, and who is criminal? This is the central tenet of labeling theory because the focus is on what activities constitute criminal behaviour within the context. This means that over time, the general perspective changes in regards to what can be labeled 'crime.' For instance, society is known to react negatively towards prostitution in the past; whereas the contemporary reaction is primarily to legalize it.
Label theory is based in the idea that behaviors are irregular when the society labels them as irregular. The label theory implies that a person commits a crime in some time of a life, but that person is not seen as deviant, while other people are deviant. Label theory explains how a behavior of a person conflicts with the norms of the society. For example, A black young men, who lives in a neighborhood controlled by gangs may be labeled as a gang member. In consequence, that young man can start to act as gang member or became one. He incorporates the label that was given to him.
The Labeling Theory is the view that labels people are given affect their own and others’ perception of them, thus channeling their behavior either into deviance or into conformity. Labels can be positive and/or negative, but I’ll focus on the negative aspects of labeling in high school. Everybody has a label in high school whether it is the “slut”, “pothead”, “freak” or the “jock”; it is one of the most apparent time periods in which individuals get labeled. Students have the mentality that whatever label is placed on them is going to be stuck with them forever, which then leads into a self-fulfilling prophecy. This, I feel, is a fear of being a “loser” that has been instilled throughout years by the principals, teachers, etc. An example of this is the pressure students are given to get a good grade. In order to get into an honors class they need to pass a certain test, should they not get into honors class the following year, then all throughout the rest of their remaining school life, they’ll never be able to be in honors class. They’ll then no longer be seen as the “smart” students they were “before”(even though they still are), they’ll now be labeled as “dumb” and eventually start to believe, and become their label. Another example of this is being labeled a “slut”. When a girl has been labeled a slut, early or in the middle of her school life, the label sticks with her all throughout her remaining school years. At first, she could reject this label, and try to “change”...
The theoretical study of societal reaction to deviance has been carried out under different names, such as, labelling theory, interactionist perspective, and the social constructionist perspective. In the sociology of deviance, the labelling theory of deviant behaviour is often used interchangeably with the societal reaction theory of deviancy. As a matter of fact, both phrases point equally to the fact that sociological explanations of deviance function as a product of social control rather than a product of psychology or genetic inheritance. Some sociologists would explain deviance by accepting without question definitions of deviance and concerning themselves with primary aetiology. However, labelling theorists stress the point of seeing deviance from the viewpoint of the deviant individual. They claim that when a person becomes known as a deviant, and is ascribed deviant behaviour patterns, it is as much, if not more, to do with the way they have been stigmatized, then the deviant act they are said to have committed. In addition, Howard S. Becker (1963), one of the earlier interaction theorists, claimed that, "social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders". Furthermore, the labelling theoretical approach to deviance concentrates on the social reaction to deviance committed by individuals, as well as, the interaction processes leading up to the labelling.
Labelling theory outlines the sociological approach towards labelling within societies and in the development of crime and deviance (Gunnar Bernburg, and D. Krohn et al., 2014, pp. 69-71). The theory purposes that, when an individual is given a negative label (that is deviant), then the individual pursues their new (deviant) label / identity and acts in a manner that is expected from him/her with his/ her new label (Asencio and Burke, 2011, pp. 163-182).
Humanity is defined by one major factor: one’s understating of the self. By understanding one’s self, one can understand society and the world that surrounds themselves. There is one thing that can often distort one’s personality, one’s identity. By identifying as one thing a person can often change how they act or do certain things. This is often found to hide one’s true motives or intention, but it can also be used to hide hidden factors that aren’t as prevalent. One’s personality and identity are very closely linked, and tend to play off one another. This fact can be show in within multiple works. To name a few authors who demonstrate this fact: Clifford Geertz, Horace Miner, and Andrei Toom. Their works seek to dive deeper
In conclusion, strain theory focus to those people who commit crime to achieve their goals and labelling theory focuses on those individuals that continue committing crime. There are some solutions that exist for example, when a youth is in conflict with the law there identity is kept secret. However, this solution only works for the youth and not for adult. Therefore, this theory should be discussed further more to fix more solutions.