Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
With good examples, what is deviance
Concepts related to deviance
Concepts related to deviance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Positivist and Constructionist theories: basic differences There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear. The Positivist Perspective Deviant theories from a positivist perspective are based on biological or social determinism. Determinism is the view that something “is determined or caused by forces beyond the individual’s control” (Thio, 2010, p. 7). Positivist sociologists apply the deterministic view to each individual deviant to determine the reason for his or her deviant behavior. Multiple theories from the positivist perspective try to explain the reason for deviant behavior. Phrenology and anomie-strain are two such theories that have been used to explain deviant behavior from this perspective. Sociologists from the older positivist perspective believed that deviant determinism was based on biological factors. Phrenology is an example that is based on biological factors. It “is the doctrine that proposes that psychological traits of personality, intellect, temperament and character are ascertainable from analysis of the protrusions and depressions of the skull” (Vukin, 2009, para. 2). Phrenology in this aspect was used to determine whether or not a person would contribute to society in a ... ... middle of paper ... ...ant can be attributed to some factor. In contrast, the constructionist perspective does not give a reason for and is not concerned with why a person has become a deviant. This perspective is worried about the meaning of deviance and how different acts are assigned as deviant. Even though both perspectives deal with who is or is not deviant, the positivist perspective is focused on the deviant and gives a reason for why someone commits a deviant act; whereas, the constructionist perspective focuses on the labeling of the deviant act and the response from other members of society in determining who is a deviant. Works Cited Thio, A. (2010). Deviant Behavior (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Vukin, M. C. (2009). Phrenology in America. Retrieved from Missouri Western State University Clearinghouse Site: http://clearinghouse.missouriwestern.edu/manuscripts/83.php
...., ISHAYA, L. D., SUMAN, K., BORKAR, U. A., PRUSTY, P. B., SRIVASTAVA, A., GUPTA, S., GUPTA, K., SREENIVASULU, S. E. & JANGUBHAI, N. M. A Conceptual Overview of Deviance and Its Implication to Mental Health: a Bio psychosocial Perspective.
In the “Deviant 101” article, Schoeplfin talks about how certain types of behaviors can be seen as deviant. He questions whether an act should be considered deviant if it does not get a response. Schoeplfin uses real and hypothetical examples throughout the article to show how deviance is measured by the reactions it receives. Also, he concludes by looking at whether the feedback from behavior has to be negative to constitute it as deviant or if the feedback can be positive as well.
The Structural Strain Theory is a theory of deviance that explains deviance as the natural outgrowth of the values, norms, and structures of society. Amer...
Crime is an irrelevant concept as it is tied to the formal social control mechanism of the State; deviance is a concept that is owned by sociology thus our study should be the sociology of deviance, rather than criminology
Goode, E. (2011). Constructionist Perspectives of Deviance. Deviant Behavior (Ninth Edition ed., ). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall, Inc..
Deviant behavior is sociologically defined as, when someone departs from the “norms”. Most of the time when someone says deviance they think against the law or acting out in a negative behavior. To sociologists it can be both positive and negative. While most crimes are deviant, they are not always. Norms can be classified into two categories, mores and folkways. Mores are informal rules that are not written; when mores are broken, they can have serious punishments and sanctions. Folkways are informal rules that are just expected to be followed, but have no real repercussions.
This essay will also approach the weaknesses of these theories. It will look at the nature/nurture debate and how most of the theories fail to take into account social and environmental factors that contribute to an individuals behaviour. It will also look at the idea of 'determinism' (Lombroso, 1876), the idea that people have absolutely no control over there actions so shouldn't be punished, but rather, treated.
Deviance is a natural part of and necessary for stability and social order in society, this according to functionalist theorist Emile Durkheim (MindEdge, Inc., 2016). Traditionally, society is generally successful in providing motivation for individuals to aspire for goals of some sort, whether through wealth, prestige or perceived power (Henslin, 2011). However, from a functional perspective, theories have been developed in identifying when lawful and equal access is not afforded to certain individuals in the process of obtaining such goals. This restriction and inequality to opportunity for access in the quest to achieve success is what is now referred to as structural strain theory, which was developed by sociologist Robert Merton (Henslin,
To first understand and study deviant behavior one must have a clear definition of what “deviant” means. Merriam-Webster defines deviant as “departing from some accepted standard of what is normal”. In the sociological study of deviant behavior, there are two distinct schools of thought on why deviant behavior occurs. The first school of thought on deviant behavior is Constructionist, also related to social Determinism. Constructionist is a theory of finding deviant behavior that says deviant behavior is not inherently the same and is defined by the social context. This theory places the cause of deviant behavior on society and the definition of “normal” as to why select behaviors are deemed deviant. The other school of thought is the Positivist
The positivist view of deviance places emphasis on individual's behavior being manipulated by outside forces (Goode, 2007, p. 23). Individual's are unable to contend with these outside forces which are beyond their control. Criminals and other deviants are created through biological defects which were responsible for their behavior, as it was something inherently organic and passed on through birth. The self-control theory of crime was developed by Travis Hirshi and Michael Gottfredson, two famous criminologists. Self-control theory, also known as the General Theory of crime, portrays deviance as stemming from the criminal's lack of ...
Deviance is defined as actions or behaviors that violate socials norms. In turn the concept of deviance is dependent on the social observation and perception. “By it’s very nature, the constructionism through which people define and interpret actions or appearances is always “social.” ”(Henry, 2009 , p. 6) One’s perception of a situation may be completely different from another depending on cultural and social factors. The way someone talks, walks, dresses, and holds themselves are all factors that attribute to how someone perceives another. In some cases what is socially or normally acceptable to one person is deviant in another’s eyes. For this reason there is a lot of gray area involving the topic of deviance because actions and behaviors are so diversely interpreted.
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.
Positivism created by August Comte, he believed Positivism theories are the concepts of the natural sciences to society, looking for absolute objective truths that can shape human behavior. Positivist theory outlines the crimes that are being define objectively, not subjectively. Certain behaviors are by their nature criminal standpoint. Positivism is gender more constructed (sex is biological). Positivism can explain what leads people to kill, but is very limited to how much to apply. Labeling is more like shaping us, the process by which deviant labels are applied and received. It speculates how people are labeled as deviant, delinquent, or criminal. Labeling has the effect on future behaviors. If being treated as a deviant could relate more
Criminologists and sociologist have long been in debate for century's to explain criminal behaviour. The two main paradigms of thought are between 'nature' and 'nurture'. Nature is in reference to a learnt behaviour where a multitude of characteristics, in society influence whether a person becomes deviant such as poverty, physical abuse or neglect. Nurture defines biological features which could inevitability lead to a individuals deviant or criminal behaviour, because criminality is believed by biological positivist to be inherited from a persons parents. However, I believe that criminal behaviour is a mixture of characteristics that lead to deviant acts such as psychological illness & Environmental factors. Therefore, this essay will aim to analyse both biological positivist and psychological positivist perspectives in hope of showing to what extent they play a role in criminal behaviour. Firstly, the essay will look at Cesare Lombroso's research on physical features and how these ideas have moved on to then develop scientific ideas such as genetics to explain criminal behaviour. Secondly, the essay will focus on external factors which may be able to explain criminal behaviour such as the social influences, life chances and Material deprivation.
This school and its criminologist focused on the criminal rather than the crime. Under this theory action is not solely an expression of free will; it is a result of both the internal and external forces, which can be both negative or positive influence human behavior. Positivist criminologists also studied how biology, physiology, and sociology impact criminal behavior. Through careful observation of offenders and the application of such theories as Darwin’s natural selection and the joint research efforts of Cesare Lombroso, and his two students turned colleagues Raffaele Garofalo and Enrico