A critical evaluation of labelling theory.
A critical evaluation of labelling theory. It is a common assumption in our society that the function of the criminal justice system is to punish wrong doers and dissuade them from repeating their actions. The result of this is that crime rates are reduced and criminals become rehabilitated back into society as good citizens. However one set of theorists that would contend this assumption strongly are labelling theorists. They believe instead that rather than diminishing criminal activity, the effect of the criminal justice system may have exactly the opposite result, by labelling offenders as 'ex-cons' or 'criminals' they may actually have the consequence of continuing and worsening the behaviour they aim to put a stop to. Labelling theorists argue that the criminal justice system can have a significant influence on causing deviant and criminal behaviour to continue. When people go through the justice system the very fact that they have now been given a label can result in their adherence to criminality, rather than curing them of the problem. Before labelling theory came into being, criminologists usually defined crime as 'behavior that violates criminal laws' (Lilly 2002: 106). However although this definition was useful in providing a rough guideline of what to look for when studying crime, it failed to take into account the many ways in which crime and criminality
How Far Has the Work of Labelling Theorists and Interactionists Helped Us to Understand Why Some People Become Criminal and Others Do Not?
How Far Has the Work of Labelling Theorists and Interactionists Helped Us to Understand Why Some People Become Criminal and Others Do Not? Most sociologists ask what the causes of crime are and try to solve crime by preventing these causes, however, labelling and interaction theorists ask why some behaviour is labelled deviant while other behaviour is acceptable. Their arguments have been discussed below. Becker was one labelling theorist who wanted to find how behaviour was labelled deviant and then become criminal. Everyone in society is potentially a criminal as all commit deviant acts. These deviant acts only become criminal when caught and given a punishment. Becker's study of Football Hooliganism shows how a group can be labelled and then creates more deviant acts. Fights at football matches are not a normal thing, they are usually isolated incidents. However, these events can be focused on and escalated to seem like a real problem by the media. The public then labels the people who go to watch football matches as Football Hooligans. The football fans gain a master status, i.e. when they wear their team's football shirt and as soon as they do they have a label attached to them of "hooligan". Due to this fear from the public about football fans, there is more police at football games. This does increase the numbers of arrest, not necessarily because there
Compare and evaluate Subcultural theory and labelling theory
Compare and evaluate Subcultural theory and labelling theory And their perspectives on crime and deviance. What makes people commit crime or deviance can be analyzed in many different ways, sociologists for many years have came up with many theories that they believe fits patterns of crime and deviance, the two that I am going to compare and discuss are the Subcultural theory and the labelling theory. I will discuss each theory individually then I will compare them to each other to see what similarities they have to each other and if they contradict each other also if they differ, and also see if either of them actually work or play any relevance on today's society. Subcultural theory Albert Cohen in 1955, first developed the Subcultural theory of working class crime and deviance, he took his research from investigating delinquent gangs in low income, inner city areas. Merton had previously wrote an article called, 'Social structure and Anomie', this concluded that people look towards developing a sense of the norm, of gaining the 'the American dream', but find that this is hard to reach with their own norms, so they reach a state of Anomie, a sense of normlessness where anything goes, they take on the attitudes and views of other people to gain 'the American dream' this making them feel Anomie. Cohen agreed with Merton that people's mainstream value of gaining
Examine critically the contribution of labelling theory to our understanding of deviance.
Q.2 Examine critically the contribution of labelling theory to our understanding of deviance. This essay will critically examine the contribution of labelling theory to our understanding of deviance. Becker (1963a) defines the labelling theory as "the process where socially defined identities are imposed or adopted, especially the deviant label. Such labels may have consequences that trap the individual into that identity." According to Browne et.al (2009) the labelling theory stemmed from interactionist views of crime and deviance and suggested that many people were involved in some sort of illegal or deviant behaviour therefore making it difficult to make a distinction between deviants and non-deviants. According to Bilton et.al (1996) the labelling theory was interested in why only some individuals and acts were defined as criminal or deviant whilst similar acts carried out by others were not. The focus of the labelling theory was according to Browne et.al (2009) the level of interaction between deviants and individuals who defined them as being so, and why some groups and individuals had been defined as deviant and the circumstances around this occurrence. How responses to rule breaking was not the same in all circumstances and the process in which rules were selectively enforced. The assumptions used by figures of authority such as police officers when choosing whether
Labelling food products.
LABELLING All food packaging has labels on it. Some are to persuade us to buy the product and some are there by law. I am going to look at what there is on a label and why it is there. Why do we package food? There are labels on food packets so that we have information about the product we are buying or just looking at. By law, food labels must include information about the contents. Labelling can also be used in marketing. The pack displays the product on the shelf and might help draw attention to the buyer. Packaging helps to prevent odour from one product getting into other foods. Packaging enables manufacturers to convey a great deal of useful information to customers. Pre-pakaged food must give the following information on the label- * Name of food * List of ingredients (unless nothing added) * Instructions for use * Storage instructions * Use by date or best before date * A lot or branch mark * Name and address of manufacturer * A statement that the food has been irradited or cntains irrated ingredients. (Short shard blast of radiation) * A statement that explains what the product is if the name does not do so. By law, a label must show: . The name of the food. 2. The weight. 3. The list of ingredients - in order of weight. 4. How the food should be stored and the date when the food should be eaten by. 5. The manufacturer . The name of the
Deviance. How does labelling someone deviant create further deviance?
How does labelling someone deviant create further deviance? Many believe that the process in which an individual is labelled deviant results to further deviance. This view is generally held by Interactionist. Interactionist and subcultural theory believes that deviance is socially constructed. Any phenomenon which is socially constructed is "invented" by participants in a particular culture or society, therefore deviance is relative and not absolute(Haralambos and Holborn, 1995), meaning it can change depending on these factors; time, society and issues. For instance the social standards in Britain have changed. Using Cannabis is was once socially acceptable to smoke cannabis - it was even used for medicinal purposes - but it is now considered deviant behaviour. In Holland however Cannabis use is not seen as deviant and is also legal. There are two types of deviance: primary and secondary (Fulcher & Scott, 1999). Lemert notes that primary deviation are acts which have not been labelled by society and therefore they are ignored or treated in a low-key way that defines them as bizarre, atypical, or significant aberrant. This behaviour is normalised by identifying the deviant act separate to the individual. E.g. A man is seen as aggressive because he is 'under stress' at work, a woman behaves oddly because it is 'that time of the month'; an elderly woman steals from a
Compare and contrast the labelling perspective and rational choice theory.
Compare and contrast the labelling perspective and rational choice theory. Intro The extent to which formal sanctions have some bearing on the behaviour of offenders is a focal point of both rational choice theory and labelling perspectives (Baumer, Wright Kristinsdottir & Gunnlaugsson, 2002). Specific deterrence models generally posit that as the severity, certainty, and swift ness of sanctions increase, which in turn reduces re-offending (Gibb, 1975) (Baumer, Wright Kristinsdottir & Gunnlaugsson, 2002). In contrast the labelling theory predicts that formal sanctions increase reoffending by promoting a criminal self concept (Baumer, Wright Kristinsdottir & Gunnlaugsson, 2002). While deterrence and labelling theories are traditionally have been viewed in opposition to one another (Liska and Messner, 1999) recent theoretical contributions have integrated concepts from these and other theories (Baumer, Wright Kristinsdottir & Gunnlaugsson, 2002). Agency Although both perspectives are considered **to be concerning themselves with agency, or individual action, they go about this task in very different ways. Labelling perspective seek to understand the 'meaning' in human behaviour (Young, 1981:286). Whereas rational choice perspective in seeks to understand and control human behaviour (1). Context Labelling perspective initially emerged in the 1960's and early 1970's
Assess The Usefulness Of Labelling Theories In Understanding Crime and deviance
ASSESS THE USEFULNESS OF LABELLING THEORIES IN UNDERSTANDING CRIME AND DEVIANCE Labelling theory suggests that deviancy is a social process usually related to power differences but it doesn't explain the causes of crime. It does however explain why some people or actions are described as deviant, and can help in understanding crime and deviance. Becker suggests that there is really no such thing as a deviant act. An act only becomes deviant when others perceive it as such. The application of a label to someone has significant consequences for how that person is treated by others and perceives him or herself. Lemert drew a distinction between primary and secondary deviance through a study of stuttering amongst a Native American nation. He observed that public oratory was important among the nation the displayed high levels of stuttering. When young boys showed any speech defect parents reacted with such concern that the child became worried about it and more nervous causing him to stutter. Therefore the primary deviance of the speech defect was not that important, it was the effect of the worried parents, labelling the child, causing the nervousness, leading to the secondary deviance of stuttering. Thus showing that if people are labelled in a certain way and treated accordingly it has greater consequences than the original deviance. Labelling can be said to be variable with
Packaging & Labelling Assesment
Food Technology How Does A Microwave Work? Microwaves work by using food molecules to vibrate rapidly, creating friction that produces heat which then cooks the food. In other words, food cooked in a microwave simply absorbs microwave and turns their energy into thermal energy, which cooks the food. It takes 18 times the electricity to bake a potato in a regular oven than in a microwave. Microwaves cook from the outside towards the center of the food. Advantages And Disadvantages Of Using A Microwave Advantages . Heats things more quickly than conventional oven 2. Heats things from the inside out 3. Don't have to warm it up before using it 4. Takes up less space than an oven 5. Doesn't throw off heat while you're cooking (useful in hot weather) 6. Safer for kids to use 7. Food keeps more nutrients when cooked in a microwave (less heat exposure), so its healthier for you. 8. Easier to clean 9. Costs less to operate . Doesn't cook evenly 2. Can't make things crispy 3. Can't use metal or foam containers 4. Can make things explode during heating. 5. If food has uneven density, it will heat up unevenly 6. Fat, sugar, and salt attract microwaves creating hot spots and uneven heating. 7. Foods higher in water (vegetables) cook faster than those lower in water (meat) so entire meals can't be cooked at the same time. 8. Center of microwave cooks more slowly than
Assess the view that crime and deviance are the product of labelling theory
Using material from item A and elsewhere, assess the view that crime and deviance are the product of labelling theory (21 marks) Some sociologists believe that crime and deviance is a result labelling which is when a label is attached to a person or group of people due to their appearance, sex, ethnicity or other factors. It is also leads individuals to believe that labelling theory can create a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is when the person begins to act according to the label and hence it comes true simply through being made. If a certain group of people have committed crime in the past they are more likely to be thought as to reoffend. Sociologists such as Cicourel investigated ‘typifications’ which are stereotypes of young offenders meaning the police focus their attentions on these ‘types’ of people. Through typifications the police concentrate on working class areas closely attaching a negative label to them. Once a label has been attached through self-fulfilling prophecy the offenders are more likely to feel victimised so may be obliged to offend again or on the other hand they may try to break the stereotype. Similarly people tend to victimised in society due to their race. Piliavin and Briar argue that police arrest youth based on physical characteristics alone. Evidence of this happening could be reflected by the trend in the 70% rise in the number
