Unformatted text preview: CCJS 105 CCJS 105 Introduction to Criminology
Nadine Frederique, PhD Candidate The Exam – 6pt curve The Exam – 6pt curve
Grades with 6pt Curve
70 60 50 A B C D F 40 # of Students 30 20 10 0 1 Grades Exam II Analysis Exam II Analysis 32 Questions from Lecture 7 Questions from Films 9 Questions from Text Book After review 3 questions were thrown out = 6pt curve People were more likely to get questions from the book wrong. The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Social Events in 1950’s & 1960’s
Civil Rights movement
Brown vs. Board of Ed Supreme Court Decisions The Great Society Making quality education available to all Increase opportunities Overcoming stigma associated with being a minority The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory George Herbert Mead
The Self – how you perceive yourself The Self – how others perceive you – family friends etc. Deviance – failure to conform to the rules observed by most of the group The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Edwin Lemert (1951) Focused on society’s reaction to deviance
Mentally Ill Drug Abusers Diabled “Labeling” or “categorizing” people occurs often Sensitized criminology to the middle class values that it had used to study criminals The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Edwin Lemert (1951)
Primary Deviance – offender’s initial act of deviance – not very important Secondary Deviance – acts after the labeled individual assumes the role of the deviant The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Labeling Ideas about why different people break the law influences the way those people will be treated by the criminal justice system.
They can be disvalued Rejected Ostracized Treated differently The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Labeling is major cause of secondary deviance Who does the labeling?
Lawmakers Police Judges Psychiatrists Friends Family The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory The Effects of Labeling
Master Status Altered Self Concepts Self Fulfilling Prophecy Harm to social relationships The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Master Status – juvenile’s status as a deviant becomes important source of identity
Status Degradation Ceremony – official processing in court publicly labels juvenile The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Master Status
Characteristics of people less likely to take on Master Status: Stake in Conformity Sensitive to how other’s view them Labeled in private rather than public Not committed to delinquent career Able to remove the label with good behavior in the future The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Altered Self Concept
Labeling affects self esteem SelfFulfilling Prophecy Labeling alters self concept Hostile reactions maintain self esteem Self concept affects behavior Juveniles act like the delinquents The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Harm to Social Relationships
Parents Friends A labeled person can have difficulty with Teachers Potential employers The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Harm to Social Relationships
Foster, Dinitz & Reckless (1972) – (in Book, pg 307) Studied perception of stigma after going to court Boys perceived no problems with School Friend’s attitudes Boys did perceive problems with Police Future Employers Parents reactions The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Harm to Social Relationships
Bernburg & Krohn (2003)
Intervention by police and juvenile justice system reduced likelihood of high school graduation Dropout affects employment opportunities Lack of employment affects adult criminality The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Critiques of Labeling
Doesn’t explain primary deviance Under what conditions with a delinquent experience an altered self concept? Little empirical evidence that labeling increases delinquency Experience with the justice system deters ½ of the time The Labeling Theory The Labeling Theory Summary
Two main points to keep in mind: Societal Reaction – focus on the meaning of deviance to the audience Secondary Deviance – what does the label do to the person labeled? ...
View Full Document
- Spring '08
- Labeling Theory, Harshad number, minority influence