Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
The labeling theory of deviant behavior, which posits that what constitutes deviant behavior is fundamentally the reaction of the environment. two studies that contradict the claim that labeling is of decisive importance in the genesis of deviant careers, and raises questions about the coherence of the approach. The document also examines the definition of deviant behavior, the concept of deviant careers, and the idea of secondary deviation.
Typology: Assignments
1 / 125
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
, • • • ff • • • • ,. ...-
--Y T • •
The National Swedish Council for Crime Prevention (BrottsfOrebyggande ra- det), established 1st July 1974, is a government agency under the Ministry of Justice. The Council is headed by a board of 17 persons appointed by the government and representing a wide range of important functions in the com- munity. The Council has an office with a permanent staff. The address is: Brottsf6rebyggande radet Box 12070 S 10222 STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN Telephone: (Stockholm) 08- The Council publishes repons in Swedish and English. The Council also issues abstracts on crime and correction in Sweden. This report can be ordered from Liber distribution Forlagsorder S-16289 VALLlNGBY Sweden
The National Swedish Council for Crime Prevention and its Scientific Reference Group consider that the contents of this report should be given wider diffusion. The opinions expressed in the report are the author's own, and the advisory committee of the Council has assumed no standpoint with regard to them.
Kristianstads Boktryckeri AB 1978 56063
INFORMATION ABOUT ~~E COUNCIL~S RESEARCH GruLlTS
The National Swedish Council for crime prevention has as its function, in accordance with its terms of re- ference from the Government of Sweden: "to follow, sup- port and take the initiative as regards resf~arch and development work on the causes and prevention of crime".
With these ends in view, a sum wf money is set aside annually for allocation among a number of research grants. Application for such grants must be made to the Council. The established period in which applica- tions may be received from individual researchers ex- pires on May 1st each year. Where the research in- volved is carried out by government bodies (usually those un~er the Ministry of Justice) the expiry date is March 15t'1.
For further informatioh and to obtain the required application form, please contact the Council.
PREFACE
This study has been made on behalf of the Scientific Reference Group of the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention. It was carried out in two parts (^) l of which the firstl a theoretical review (^) l came in the summer of 1975. But as a theoretical examination is not sufficient to give an idea of how much weight a theory will bear (^) l I was asked to investigate and see how well founded the labeling approach is empirically. The second part of my examination was made in the spring of 1976. This second part is probably more accessible to readers I and it can be read separately.
Labeling theory has become very popular. It has reached a great number of people and been widely accepted as an explanation for criminal and other deviant behavior. As a theory of this kind provides a certain view of reality, such acceptance means that the approach has lain behind many contributions to discussion and to some extent it has influenced criminal and social policy. When a good theory is adopted it offers favorable opportunities for. constructive action. With a bad theoryl on the other .hand (^) l the results can be unfortunate.
Labeling theory implies a policy of non-intervention: notfiing should be done since taking measures would only make the situation worSE:. This calls into question the activities and very ~xistence of the police (^) l youth- welfare committees and National Prison and Probation Administrat.ion; the rest:lts of their work are held to run directly counter to their respective aims.
However I an examination of the labeling approach reveals that, regarded a.s a ·theory lit contains much weakness and also has a poor empirical foundation. To build a program of action on such a theory would necessarily
be a hazardous undertaking. If we follow a policy of not intervening, it may not produce at all the favorable effects which the theory would lead us to expect; on the contrary, the problems involved may only be aggra- vated. We would risk,into the bargain, being deprived of opportunities to solve the problem in a purposeful manner.
In various ways, criminal and other asocial behavior gives rise to social distress, and curtailment of this must be our aim. To achieve it, the difficulty may perhaps be not that we go too far, but that we fail to go far enough.
stockholm, November 1976
Johannes Knutsson
8
SUMMARY
Since the theoretical labeling approach appeared at the beginning of the Sixties, it has exerted very great influence both on discussion about criminal and other deviant behavior and on the view people take.
Two sociologists are usually mentioned as forerunners of the approach: Tannenbaum and Mead.
Tannenbaum is best known for his "dramatization of evil" concept. That term denotes the process whereby the definition of certain behavior as evil is extended to include the individual involved - he, too, is char- acterized as evil.
Mead was a pioneer of symbolic interactionism. In the view of this school, self-awareness is created in the individual through interplay between him and his en- vironment. He is treated in a certain way, as a person with certain characteristics, and by acc.epting the image of himself thus conveyed he acquires a self-concept. We may say that the basis on which a person gains ex- perience of himself as someone with a certain identity is his ability to see himself through the eyes of others.
Mead distinguished two aspects present in this self- awar€'ness: "me" and "I". "Me" is a SOC1.,,1 !,rod'..lct and consists essentially of the image conveyed by the societal environment. It is through "I" that the in(U- vidual integrates the environment's view of him. This "I" represents the person's conduct and has a biologi- cal foundation. While "me" uan be predicted by charting the individual's environment and establishing the way in which he is treated by it, "I" is impulsive and creative, representing what is spontaneous and un- predictable in the individual.
9 The labeling theorists have concerned themselves with the socially-determined "me" in self-awareness. Seen from that standpoint, the person's self-concept is a result of how he has been treated and of the expectations placed upon him.
The labeling approach cannot be regarded as constitu- ting a well-integrated theory. Rather, its advocates have taken a common viewpoint in analyzing criminal behavior. Among the best-known names in the field are Becker, Lemert, Scheff and Goffman. In Sweden, Lunden and Nasman have published contributions.
The theoretical survey which follows takes in descrip- tions of various central concepts and asumptions. I try thereafter to establish whether the labeling theor- ists have been logical and consistent in their presen- tation and to analyse the consequences of their assump- tions. This analysis is carried out on the premise that the labeling perspective may be regarded as constituting a theory. A certain arbitrariness is present in my choice of the principal conceptions and suppositions described; it is caused for one thing by the complexity of the approach. The rule has been applied, however, that attention should be given to what is considered typical of the perspective.
The Theory
Labeling theory holds that on some occasion everybody shows behavior that can be called deviant. For various reasons, only certain people are labeled as deviant because of this behavior. Labeling entails that the identity assigned to an individual is in some respect altered to his discredit. Certain qualities connected with the behavior are at~ributed to him. The behavior which becomes -the object of labeling is called the primary deviation. Essentially, two effects come from labeling. On the one hand, an individual's social situ-
11 Labeling
This means that certain negative qualities are ascribed to people. The labeling may come from those closest in the individual's environment, from other social groups and finally from wi thin the individual himself.
Deviant Caree.rs
Labeling entails an altered social situation and a transformed self-image. Together, these factors give rise to deviant careers with ever-increa~ing involve- ment in deviant behavior.
Howard Becker and Edwin Lemert have carried out studies of two different deviant types of careers.
Becker has studied how a steady use of marihuana is established. He lists various conditions which must be fulfilled if such use is to arise. One of these is the user's belief that he can conceal his marihuana smoking from his environment. Another is his ability to neutral- ize popular stereotypes about drug-takers. Here, by implication Becker is claiming that labeling exerts a deterrent effect sinc~when labeling does occur, in order to be a user the person must be capable of neu- tralizing the perception of drug-addicts conveyed through the labelin~ Thus, there are contradictions in Beckers's views about labeling and its effects.
Lemert has studied systematic check-forgers. Such a
His social situation produces an identity problem. In order to solve it, the forger acts in such a 1~ay that he gets caught. His criminal identity is confirmed by this. Lemert thus suggests that no labeling occurred before the forgcr'3 crimi~al c~reer began but only after- wards. The conclusion is that these two studies contra- dict the claim that labeling is of decisive importance in the genesis of deviant careers.
The Deviant Identity
When the individual is treated as having certain qual- ities which are attached to the stigma conveyed through labeling, his identity is transformed and becomes deviant. The labeling process therefore gives rise to a "self- fulfilling prophecy".
It is unclear, however, what the term "deviant identity" really means. Sometimes usage gives the impression that such identity is unequivocally determined by those who label the inJividual. At other times it seems to orig- inate as a kind of defence against what is imputed tu him. tAlhen he turns to a group where others are also labeled, he forms a self-image which has its source in the "anti-ideology" created by that deviant group. The labeling theorists have not made it clear whether in cases of this kind they regard the self-image as being totally of social determination, nor have they made it plain from what source they believe that the deviant self-image comes.
Secondary Deviation
Labeling increases the likelihood of continued deviant behavior.
Conversely, this implies tha~ if labeling did not take place deviant behavior would remain on the "primary level". But we cannot say that there is a fixed level of primary deviance because the deviation becomes primary on being labeled, and labeling leads in turn to secondary deviance. Should the interpretation not be as follows? Without labeling there would exist only norm-violating behavior, which is understood to be more or less free of problems.
the labeling theory presented by Lunden and Nasman, its leading Swedish advocates.
According to this interpretation, everybody violates the law now and then. But control agencies of the criminal justice system so function that they method- ically select and label individuals of lower social
lower social class are more extensively labeled than those from a higher social group. Labeling entails a transformed self-image and an altered social situation. Together (^) l these changes lead to deviant careers. Labeling therefore increases the likelihood of continued crimi- nal behavior.
Three hypotheses can be considered central to the theory. The first is that a systematic selection occurs such that persons with low social status are selected for labeling. The second is that labeling gives rise to an altered self-image and the third is that labeling increases the probability of continued criminal behavior.
a bibliography of published contributions to the
ferent scientific journals are included. Of these articles (^) l 128 have been taken from seven large reviews. Over seventy are considered to be empirical studies. However, a great many of these have to do with psychi- at~·ic issues. Some twenty are used to throw light on how well founded, empirically, the labeling theory is. They have been supplemented with other information.
As for the selection hypothesis I it may be fflid that American studies included in the material do not sup- port the idea that social status accounts for legal
committed. On the other hand,sdme investigations do rev~al a tendency toward severer measures against individuals from lower social groups.
15
As Swedisch society differs in many respects from American society, I have also gone through some Swedish studies. These do not support the idea of a social se- lection. But two reservations must be made. The Swedish investigations concern only young people - and data on the actions of the authorities concerned is not entirely adequate.
From one study's findings there does seem to be a ten- dency for those labeled to have images of themselves as criminals. However, this does not necessarily indicate a causal connection between labeling and a criminal self-image. It is most active criminals who get caught and thereby labeled. Consequently, in the study mentioned previous criminality is not held constant. To be able to say whether a causal connection exists, we must be able to compare two groups, one labeled and the other not, with similar levels of criminality.
It is probably difficult to test the hypotheets that labeling leads to continued criminal activity. But having regard to the information from criminal sta- tistics, the idea that labeling always leads to new offences may be rejected. If the thesis were correct, none of those lab~led would ever cease to violate the law. Yet when offenders are divided up according to age we find no recidivism for the great majority of young people who have been in trouble with the police.
A more plausible way of putting the hypothesis would be to say that labeling increases the likelihood of continued offences. This probability can be elucidated by means of the statistics on recidivists. According to the labeling theory, prison sentences should lead to relapses in most cases. However, among first offend- ers convicted of other than minor offences recidivism is no greater for those sent to prison than for those put on probation. This renders less convincing the hypothesis that labeling increases the likelihood of continued criminal conduct.
PART I
A THEORETICAL REVIEW
18 1 INTRODUCTION
The theoretical labeling approach is made up of works published mainly from the 1960's onward. The names usually mentioned in this connection are those of Lemert, Becker, Scheff and Goffman. In Sweden, Borglind, Lunden and Nasman have published contributions on the labeling approach. The approach cannot be said to comprise a very coherent theory; rather, these writers have pro- ceeded from some common points of departure when ana- lyzing deviant behavior. To put the matter briefly: in their discussions of deviance they focus on the reactions of the social environment and its control agencies to behavior described as deviant; as well as on how these reactions affect the individuals who are considered to be deviant.
Frank Tannenbaum and George Herbert Mead are cuslomarily named as forerunners of the school. Tannenbaum is best known for his "dramatization of evil" concept. This covers a process of "tagging, defining, identifying, segregating, describing, emphasizing, making conscious and selfconscious ... " (Tannenbaum, 1938: in Rubington & Weinberg, 1968; p. 18.) When the behavior of individuals has bLen defined as evil, that definition is transferred to the individuals themselves: they are described as evil. According to Tannenbaum, measures taken against them by the community through its control agencies have a result opposite to that intended. "The harder they (the control agencies) work to reform the evil, the greater the evil grows under their hands." (Idem)
Mead is the founder of symbolic interactionism which provides the labeling perspective with one of its cor- nerstones. Since he is considered such a central figure in this context, it may be of value to describe some of his principal ideas. Now, it is true that many of his fundamental concepts are included in the conceptual apparatus of sociology and social psychology and are
