Crime and deviance
Labelling theories of crime and deviance
Objectives
1. Identify and define why labelling theorist regard
crime as socially constructed.
2. Identify and define the labelling process and its
consequences for those who are labelled.
3. Apply and evaluate the strengths and limitations
of the labelling theory in explaining crime and
deviance.
The effects of labelling
 Labelling theorist are interested in the effect of
labelling upon those who are labelled.
 They believe that by labelling certain people as
criminal or deviant, society actually encourages
them to become more so.
What is

In your notebook write down in your own words the
definition for each of the terms below which can
be found on page 82-83 of your course book.
1. Primary deviance 1. Secondary deviance -
Jock Young
 Used the concepts of secondary deviance and
deviant career in his study of hippy marijuana users
in Notting Hill (primary deviance),
 Findings:
you think
of a particular
group
in
Can
Persecution
and labelling
by the control
culture
(police) led to
the hippies
seeing themselves
contemporary
society
to whom
we couldasapply
outcast,
Jock Young findings ?
 Being outsider promoted the use of drugs which
brought further negative attention thus creating a self
fulfilling prophecy,
Deviance amplification
 Read through the Deviance amplification section of
your handout
 Complete the activity on your handout
‘Folk Devils and Moral Panics’ –
Stanley Cohen
 “If we do not take steps to preserve the purity of blood, the
Jew will destroy civilisation by poisoning us all.” (Hitler,
1938)
 “Surely if the human race is
under threat, it is reasonable
to segregate AIDS victims,
otherwise the whole of man- kind could be engulfed.”
(Daily Star, 1988)
Moral Panics
 “The more comfortable the language of anti-
terrorism is to us, the more familiar the terrorist
figure who haunts us, the more entrenched that
seizure of our political imagination.” (Fortin)
Cohen’s research was a departure from traditional subcultural theory – his
emphasis was on the reaction to the disturbances which took place in
Clacton, Easter 1964. Cohen’s work deployed a synthesis of structural and
labelling theories.
 The amount of serious violence had been minimal.
 Most young people who had gone to the seaside did not
identify with either Mods or Rockers.
 In short, the mass media had painted a distorted picture
of events.
 This set in process a ‘deviancy amplification spiral.’ As
public concern was ratcheted up, the police became
sensitised to the phenomena…
The police made more arrests, the media reported more
deviance, more young people readily identified with the
Mods and Rockers…the initial disproportionate response
of various state and media control agencies generated
more, not less ‘deviance.’
 Cohen went further; the media had created a moral panic; ‘a condition,
episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a
threat to societal values and interests.’ These ‘folk devils’ constituted a
threat to the prevailing social order.
Deviancy Amplification Spiral
* ‘Law and public opinion stipulate that there are many ideas and
opinions which are to be condemned as outside the pale of consensus.’
(Fowler, 1991)
* ‘Deviancy amplification’ – Selective attention of crime control agencies,
news and public concern on particular aspects of perceived and real
increases in deviance = MORAL PANIC!!
So, ‘the media, wittingly or unwittingly, reproduce the
definitions of the powerful.’ (Eldridge, 1997)
 ‘More moral panics will be generated and other, as yet
nameless folk devils will be created. This is not
because such developments have an inexorable inner
logic, but because our society as presently structured
will continue to generate problems for some of its
members…and then condemn whatever solution these
groups find.’ (Cohen, 1987)
Have a think ?
Can you think of
contemporary
examples of moral
panics ?
Labelling and criminal justice policy
 Recent studies have showed how increase ion attempt to
control and punish are having the opposite effect,
 Triplett (2000) – notes an increasing tendency to see
young offenders as evil and less tolerant of minor
deviance,
 CJS relabeling of status offences such as such as
truancy as more serious offences has resulted in
harsher sentences,
 This has in turn resulted in an increase rather than
decrease in offending amongst young people with levels
of violence rising.
Labelling and criminal justice policy
 De Haan (2000) notes a similar outcome to Triplett
as a result of the increasing stigmatisation of young
offenders,
 These result show that the labelling theory has very
serious implication when it comes to policy making,
 Extreme rules and regualtions have a negative
impact on offending figures thus logically we should
make fewer rules for people to break,
 Decriminalisation of soft drugs
Reintegrative shaming
 John Braithwaite (1989)
 Disintegrative shaming
 Reintegrative shaming
 Avoids stigmatisation of an offender as evil and
encourages others to forgive them and accept them
back
Evaluation of the labelling theory
In groups using the flipchart paper how
would you evaluate the labelling theory
make sure that you justify your points .
Homework
Page 85 of course book
Using material from Item A and elsewhere
assess the view that crime and deviance are
the product of labelling processes.
Due Friday
Helpful Tips
Write 5 top tips or golden rules about the topic for
students taking the lesson next year.
Develop with snowballing, group answers or posters etc.