Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Learning Theory and Its Importance
Effect of peer pressure on the society
Weakness and strengths of labelling theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The main aim of this essay is to describe two general theories of offending and then consider the extent to which they explain youth offending. This essay will firstly outline the context of the labelling theory then go on to discuss the way in which a label becomes a person’s master status in life. The essay will then compare the differences with primary and secondary deviance and define the term self fulfilling prophecy. The second stage of the essay will describe the learning theory, explaining the background including all the terms, classical conditioning, operant conditioning and social learning theory. Furthermore, it will then go on to explore the research and describe the extent to which both theories explain youth offending. Finally, the essay will compare and contrast the two theories and evaluate any of the assets or implications. The labelling theory became dominant within society during the 1940’s and 1950’s, when a group of graduate students from the Chicago school tried a different approach to applying theory to deviant behaviour. Within this group was a highly influential young man, Howard S.Becker who became the person most recognised for his work with the labelling of crime (Williams.F. McShaneM. 2010.p110). Becker argued that labels could be applied through the social reaction of others when a deviant or criminal act had been committed he stated that “Labelling is the process of identifying, categorising and stereotyping social categories such as delinquents” (Davies.M.et.al.2010.p30). When an individual becomes labelled a criminal, people do not consider all the praiseworthy things they may have done previously, they just see that they have committed some form of deviance and are now judged within societ... ... middle of paper ... ...more stimulus for the individual to learn from (Williams.F. McShane.M.2010.p241). Furthermore, deviance within the labelling theory is defined through society’s norms and value’s, where as the deviance within the learning theory is imitation of deviance from society. To conclude this essay, it would be safe to say that the labelling theory and the learning theory both have great powers over young people’s lives, possibly because of their vulnerability and the way they perceive different behaviour within society. With criminal and deviant acts being formed and constructed by society, then behaviour displayed by a young person will inevitably be labelled if they do not live up to the norms and value’s that are in place. However, as the essay explains young people will gather characteristics of deviance from society’s influential structures.
2. When looking at the labeling theory, those who are deviant get labeled which unfortunately results in isolating from the society they live in. deviant activity means those actions contrary to the norms whether discovered or not. Labeling shows a distinction between breaking the rules and deviance with deviance being that rule breaking that is labeled. Conflict theory focuses on different interests of members of society.
Bohm and Brenda L. Vogel, the Labeling theory is used to explain why people commit crimes and conceive themselves as criminals. Overall the Labeling theory consists of social groups creating rules and then applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. This theory is split into two types of deviances: primary deviance and secondary deviance. Primary deviance is the initial criminal act, for example, a man robs a bank. A secondary deviance is committing a crime after the first criminal act and accepting the label of a criminal. Following the previous example, after the man robs the bank, he decides to do it again because he now sees himself as a criminal bank robber and wants to continue doing it and is okay with being seen that
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
Secondly, differential association varies based on the intensity, duration, frequency, priority, and timing of one’s process of learning. Through this notion, the individual’s self is disregarded and more emphasis is placed on the extrinsic factors. Furthermore, “it is an individual’s experiences and the ways in which the individual defines those experiences which constitute to the learning of criminality”. (Gongenvare & Dotter, 2007,
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.
What are theories of crime? Why are they important? In this paper, will discuss two crime theories. Social learning theory and the labeling theory. We will compare both crime theories. It will also explain how these theories are related to specific crimes. The two theories discussed will also explain the policy implications. Finally, we will address what types of programs can be created to mitigate specific crimes related to the causation theories.
Labelling theory was suggested by Edwin Lemert (1912- 1996) in 1951 and it was then developed by Howard Becker (b.1928) in 1963. This theory is related to the Social Action perspective. The labelling procedure includes deviancy and crime, certain acts are criminal because they have been labelled in that way, these labels are created by the powerful in society, such as the government. Frank Tannenbaum (1893- 1969) stated the self-fulfilling prophecy could occur when somebody is labelled as a 'criminal'. Self-fulfilling prophecy is when a prediction of something which then becomes a fact. If you have the label of 'delinquency' or 'crime' then the individual may find it difficult to get a job therefore earning less money which could result in them returning to crime. People in society will expect 'criminals' to behave in a certain way. The people with this label may find it challenging to fit into society. Moral panics is a definition which is given when a group of people become known as a threat to societies beliefs.
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”...
Some of the explanations of delinquency insinuates that education, politics, social factors, family issues among others are the main causes of delinquency (Rutter, 2013).Just as these were some of the factors in “There Are No Children Here”. In addition, criminal investigators formulated several theories which explain causes of delinquency. Among them are social factors which are explained through several theories which include Social Reaction Theory also referred to as Labeling theory and Power control
If the agents of social control define youngsters as delinquents for breaking the law, those youngsters become deviant. They have been labelled as such by those who have the power to make labels stick. However Becker argued ‘deviance is not a quality that lies in behaviour itself but in the interaction between the person who commits an act and those who respond to it’. From this point of view, deviance is produced by a process of interaction between the potential deviant and the agents of control. Becker then examined the possible effects on an individual being labelled as deviant and that a deviant label can lead to further deviance.
Labelling theory, stemming from the influences of Cooley, Mead, Tannenbaum, and Lemert, has its origins somewhere within the context of the twentieth century. However, Edwin Lemert is widely considered the producer and founder of the original version of labelling theory. This paper, not a summary, provides a brief history of labelling theory, as well as, its role in the sociology of deviance. It attempts to explore the contributions made by labelling theorists, the criticism towards labelling theorists, and the discussion surrounding its reality as an actual theory. In essence, the main focus of this paper besides proving an understanding of Howard Becker, is to describe and evaluate `labelling theory` to the study of crime and deviance, by way of an in depth discussion.
Therefore, if the individual role amongst his conventional group and his institutional group is failure, then he or she will participate in crime and commit to what is expected of him, through these groups, once strain causes bonds to weaken a youth is free to engage in delinquency.
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).
As a society we often find it difficult to swallow the fact that children are capable of engaging in and committing crimes. The thought of a child, a being that represents innocence, would perform an act that deviates to social order shocks and confuses society. The questions of, how could you do that? What were you thinking? Which, then leads to statements like, “We did not raise that way! ” or “You know better than that!” when trying to comprehend the concept of the unacceptable actions of juveniles. Suicides, runaways, and later life offending seem to have a common link of juvenile delinquency. Children deviating from societal norms can affect the future of society because offending. Juvenile offending can be the result of a plethora of culprits and perhaps, as a society we can to come to terms with there not being one exclusive answer to explain why juveniles deviate from social norms.