Labeling Theory PDF

Preview

Summary

lecture notes on labeling theory
taught by professor Molly Buchanan...

Description

10.24.19 Labeling Theory labeling theory: intervention via the CJ system may increase criminal behavior - stigma - deterrence theorists think the opposite History of Labeling Theory overlapping timeframe with age of discontent (1960s - 1970s) far-reaching public discontent civil disobedience, riots → race, war, government crisis of legitimacy in american institutions (CJ system) all total institutions were viewed as problematic - mental hospitals, prisons, orphanages - doing more harm than good strong support for decentralization labeling theory re-emerged - CJ interference can actually create, intensify, and perpetuare criminal behavior deinstitutionalization: no more reforms → empty the institutions - prisons didn’t empty but a lot of mental hospitals and juvenile detentions did two possible hypotheses: - label as independent variable - predictor - label as dependent variable - outcome Steps you think you’re a normal person, but then: 1) primary deviance a) normal youth 2) emphasis of deviance a) overreaction 3) stigmatization a) perception of others’ judgement 4) self-perception a) i’m not normal, i am a deviant 5) secondary deviance a) guess i’m a criminal

Psychology of Labeling Theory

10.24.19 early roots: labeling theory started a long time ago symbolic interactionism: use others you care about as a gauge of who you are → reference group - strangers can make you question yourself too - affects self-perception the looking-glass self: looking at yourself through other people’s eyes - what you think they think of you - we become what we think others think we are dramatization of evil: tannenbaum 1938 - societal overreaction to normal youthful behavior - say it’s ‘for their own good’ - defining an act as evil → defining a person as evil - changes individual’s self-concept - process of making a criminal - 1) tagging, defining, highlighting certain behaviors as abnormal / bad - 2) makes youth self-conscious - 3) stimulates, suggests, emphasizes, and evokes the ‘bad traits’ - 4) more serious offences can follow - a) formal arrest / incarceration dramatizes evil more - i) informal counts too ex: teachers - b) forced companionship with other deviants through incarceration - i) especially with juveniles Labeling as the Independent Variable derived from social interactionism social pathology: edwin lemert (1951) - expanded early labeling ideas - primary & secondary deviance - 1) commit deviant act even though self-concept is not deviant - 2) caught → identity no longer detached from behavior - 3) more deviant acts due to change in self-identity even if they didn’t feel self conscious, the label affects life chances / opportunities lowered self concept may lead to more criminal behavior - everyone’s self-concept is affected differently cumulative continuity: negative effects of official intervention snowball - reduced life chances - school, job, housing - continuing criminality is more likely

10.24.19 labeling-life chance studies: does being labeled affect one’s life chances? - strong evidence that it does - people who commit a crime and don’t get caught are more successful than those who do - label given in teens carries into their 30s, affecting life chances contacts & associations can change because of labeling - also expected to affect criminal behavior - labeling leads to more delinquent friends which increases criminal behavior arrest or police contact affects → self-concept, life chances, and contacts & associations, → which affect future criminal behavior radical non-intervention: benign neglect - Schur (1973) - ignore the small stuff… only step in if super serious - only helps if the label is the problem - diversion: avoid the system through other programs - narrow intervention to juveniles that pose “manifest danger” - widened the net of CJ system - ended up increasing number of juveniles that got involved in the system - net widening - ended up putting juveniles with less serious offenses in the “system” Label as Dependent Variable look for factors / concepts that predict likelihood of being labeled - Becker, Rosenhan - mala prohibita & mala in se - why certain behavior is socially defined as wrong - extralegal factors: race, age, gender, socioeconomic status - why certain people are selected for stigmatization & criminalization capitalism: requires growth - growth requires capital: surplus product - consequences of capitalism: inequality, finite resources, class conflict - conflict theory - criminological relevance → criminal & civil laws - law reflects the interests of the owners of means of production - ex: Chambliss’ law of vagrancy - serfs, highway robbery, riots - historical observation of serfs not being allowed to leave but being arrested for being vagrants

10.24.19 Howard S. Becker (1963): the outsiders - relativity of definition of crime - impact of sociological factors on whether (or which) act / person get labeled deviant - extralegal factors - power & resources - social distance - community tolerance - visibility of deviant behavior - the degree to which an act is labeled deviant depends on who commits the act and who has been harmed by it Rosenhan Experiment (1973): sane people purposely admitted to a psych ward - professionals’ mindset produced label as much as diagnosis itself Piliavin & Briar (1974): racial discrimination - discretion in CJ system & by law enforcement Powder Cocaine less amount of jail time as if you had the same amount of crack seen as glamorous and wealthy not seen as a criminal justice crisis Crack Cocaine lower income minorities amplified the war on drugs mass incarceration inner cities Opiates heroin 18-26+ middle class, white treatment programs treated as a public health crisis...