Labeling Theory in Deviance Research: A Critique and Reconsideration NANErr J. DAVIs, Michigan State University The labeling, or interactionist, theory of deviance is reviewed and critically evaluated with brief attention focused on alternative formulations as these have influenced the labeling conception. After examining labelling theory and criticisms of it, I look at how the theory could be interpreted regarding different disorders. 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. It is questionable what part of devian… Individuals can rationalize their ‘deviant’ behaviour. This type of deviance, unlike primary deviance, has major implications for a person’s status and relationships in society and is a direct result of the internalization of the deviant label. Labelling Theory and Social Reality: a Marxist Critique. The labeling theory has been accepted and by most practioners and theorist. The major criticisms of labeling theory include the following: the various propositions to be tested are not adequately specified; due to the lack of satisfactory data and empirical research, evaluating the adequacy of labeling theory has been difficult; labeling theory focuses on the reaction to criminal and/or … The chapter explores strategies for resisting potential negative effects of labelling. The labeling, or interactionist, theory of deviance is reviewed and critically evaluated with brief attention focused on alternative formulations as these have influenced the labeling conception. 2009. Corrections? Labelling theory was developed by Howard Becker and is most associated with the sociology of deviance. PROB. Labeling theory prospered throughout the 1960s, bringing about policy changes such as deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill and juvenile diversion programs. They argue that such groups do commit more crime and there are real social reasons for it. – It tends to be determinstic, not everyone accepts their labels – It assumes offenders are just passive – it doesn’t recognise the role of personal choice in committing crime – It gives the offender a ‘victim status’ – Realists argue that this perspective actually ignores the actual victims of crime. As members in society begin to treat these individuals on the basis of their labels, the individuals begin to accept the labels themselves. There are two main kinds of criticisms of labelling theory -- theoretical and positivistic (for the latter, see Gove). We can thus conclude that labelling theory does have an effect, but is not the primary cause for most of the acts committed. A question became popular with criminologists during the mid-1960s: What makes some acts and some people deviant or criminal? By signing up for this email, you are agreeing to news, offers, and information from Encyclopaedia Britannica. Insurgent Sociologist 1975 6: 1, 53-66 Download Citation. Others have strongly disagreed with Becker. 27. It is applied to education in relation to teachers applying labels on their pupils in terms of their ability, potential or behaviour. This pathway from primary deviance to secondary deviance is illustrated as follows: primary deviance → others label act as deviant → actor internalizes deviant label → secondary deviance. Her contributions to SAGE Publications's. Empirical tests have not been tested on the population and it therefore cannot be taken to be accurate. In particular, Lemert’s theory can be criticized for not giving enough weight to primary deviance. Secret deviant represents those individuals who have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behaviour but have not been perceived as deviant by society; therefore, they have not been labeled as deviant. The results of this stigmatization is a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the offenders come to view themselves in the same ways society does. Pure deviant represents those individuals who have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behaviour that has been recognized as such; therefore, they would be labeled as deviant by society. It is through the labeling theory that other theorist build a foundation on other developing theories. The Contribution of the Labelling Theory to Our Understanding of Crime and Deviancy We can call a label, or define it as; a mark, name, or even badge. Updates? Statistics are gathered to show that much deviance occurs in anticipation of any labelling and to show that labelling may reduce the incidence of deviance. These labels can be positive or negative and can result in a self-fulfilling prophecy. There have been criticisms that the terms in labelling theory lack precision, and that there is no real account taken of the central social processes, such as how every day behaviour actually needs to have a societal reaction. Critique of the criminal, the theory, and society. In other words, an individual engages in a behaviour that is deemed by others as inappropriate, others label that person to be deviant, and eventually the individual internalizes and accepts this label. This notion of social reaction, reaction or response by others to the behaviour or individual, is central to labeling theory. The focus of these theorists is on the reactions of members in society to crime and deviance, a focus that separated them from other scholars of the time. "The earliest critiques of labeling objected to the theory's disregard for the actual behavior of the deviant and the image of the deviant being coerced by the labeling process into a deviant identity role. The labeling theory has been critiqued at a very critical level. 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. There are three major theoretical directions to labeling theory. (-) The labelling theory has been criticised for being too deterministic -> it doesn’t allow some people to choose deviance, and labelling doesn’t always lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy or more deviance. The understanding that punishment and social sanctions can be paradoxical and cause further deviant behaviour has influenced a number of other theories, but labelling theories have also often been subject to criticism since their very inception. According to sociologists like Emile Durkheim, George Herbert Mead, and Kai T. Erikson, deviance is functional to society and keeps stability by defining boundaries. Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article. (Akers & Seller. Labeling theory posits that self-identity and the behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them. Those are that society changes, and so does labelling. Critical to this theory is the understanding that the negative reaction of others to a particular behaviour is what causes that behaviour to be labeled as “criminal” or “deviant.” Furthermore, it is the negative reaction of others to an individual engaged in a particular behaviour that causes that individual to be labeled as “criminal,” “deviant,” or “not normal.” According to the literature, several reactions to deviance have been identified, including collective rule making, organizational processing, and interpersonal reaction. Criticism of labelling theory has taken the form of an empirical refutation of its basic proposition that label- ling causes deviance.''. Despite the refreshing approach of labelling theory, there are a number of serious criticisms: There is a tendency to over-romanticise accounts of deviance, which in their concern for the 'underdog' can distort the reality of crime; some of it is pretty nasty. During this time, scholars tried to shift the focus of criminology toward the effects of individuals in power responding to behaviour in society in a negative way; they became known as “labeling theorists” or “social reaction theorists.”. Critical to this theory is the understanding that the negative reaction of others to a particular behaviour is what causes that behaviour to be labeled as “criminal” or “deviant.” Furthermore, it is the negative reaction of others to an individual engaged in a particular behaviour that causes that individual to be labeled as “criminal,” “deviant,” or “not normal.” Omissions? The first as well as one of the most prominent labeling theorists was Howard Becker, who published his groundbreaking work Outsiders in 1963. Create your own unique website with customizable templates. This suggests that labelling theory only offers a partial view on crime and deviance. The approaches of Edwin M. Lemert and Howard S. Becker are certainly among the most influential theories in (critical) criminology. Get exclusive access to content from our 1768 First Edition with your subscription. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click on download. Labeling (Social Reaction)Theory. Primary deviance refers to initial acts of deviance by an individual that have only minor consequences for that individual’s status or relationships in society. Falsely accused represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behaviour but have been perceived as deviant; therefore, they would be falsely labeled as deviant. In spite of these, the major drawback of the labelling theory is the lack of empirical data to support it. The focus of this perspective is the interaction between individuals in society, which is the basis for meanings within that society. Labelling theorists studied the various interactions between the ‘criminal’ groups and individuals and the conformist society. It is difficult to test and many sociologists do not perceive it to be a true theory. Criticism of labelling theory One of the criticisms of the theory is that it is impractical. Be on the lookout for your Britannica newsletter to get trusted stories delivered right to your inbox. Assistant Professor of Criminology, University of Central Arkansas. Labeling theory, in criminology, a theory stemming from a sociological perspective known as “symbolic interactionism,” a school of thought based on the ideas of George Herbert Mead, John Dewey, W.I. to criticisms of labeling theory, see H. BECKER, Labeling Theory Reconsidered in THE OUTSIDERS (2d ed. These theorists suggested that powerful individuals and the state create crime by labeling some behaviours as inappropriate. Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). Key concepts: primary and secondary deviance, Braithwaite’s reintegrative shaming theory, Matsueda and Heimer’s differential social control theory, https://www.britannica.com/topic/labeling-theory, The History Learning Site - The Labelling Theory, Pace University - Digital Commons - Labeling and Deviance: Fraternities and Gangs, University of New Hampshire - College of Liberal Arts - Labeling Theory and the Effects of Sanctioning on Delinquent Peer Association.