Labeling Theory And Self Identity

Labeling theory was created by a sociologists during the 1960s. Labeling theory is a theory that identifies the behavior of an individual because of their influences that classifies or describes the acts they committed. Howard S. Becker was highly influential and help contribute information that created a huge buzz about Labeling theory. Howard S. Becker's made a classic statement about Labeling theory. In Constructions of Deviance: Social power, Context, and Interaction. According to page forty-one Becker believed Labeling theory advanced a realistic perspective on how deviance is perceived. Howard S. Becker argued that deviance is not within individuals' behaviors but in the response others have to these. Deviance behavior is closely related to social construction forged by a various audience. Depending on the situation certain behavioral acts maybe perceived differently depending on the circumstance. Becker discovered the root of deviance by observing the response of people rather than the behavioral act itself, once people have acts labeled their perpetrators are labeled

The labeling theory addresses deviants and puts concern on behaviors that other theories do not. Most theories are primarily concerned with why individuals commit more crime. Rather than analyzing the occurrence of crimes among social groups, the labeling theory challenge us to truly understand deviants and what it means to be categorized as a deviant individual. Unlike the control theories that assumes all of us must be held in check or “controlled” if we are to resist the temptation to commit criminal or delinquency acts, this paper will dissect some important contributions the labeling theory has made to the study of juvenile delinquency (pg.107). In addition, we will discuss the labeling process, some causes of becoming labeled and also the prevention steps taken to decrease juvenile delinquency.

Sociologists have developed six main sociological theories of deviance. Emile Durkheim’s Anomie theory suggests that people become disconnected from society because they feel that the norms are inadequate examples for behavior. Durkheim said, “We must not say that an action shocks the common conscience because it is criminal, but rather that it is criminal because it shocks the

Assuming that the labeling theory is correct, we can solve the juvenile crime problem several ways. The idea of a connection between formal criminal labeling and eventual deviance is especially pertinent to juvenile justice. Labeling an offender which results in being rejected socially is not an effective method of crime control. As we discussed, juveniles who are labeled can be stigmatized and lead to an eventual career as a criminal. Instead of discouraging participation in conventional activities by labeling and isolating offenders, Braithwaite found that juvenile crime policy should be remedial and foster reintegration following shame (Braithwaite, 1989). This could be conducted through closer observation of academics, advisement in

Once a person is labeled deviant, opportunities for conforming behavior are seriously reduced and behavioral opportunities that remain open are primarily deviant ones; budding deviant increasingly exhibits deviant behavior because his or her choices are restricted by society. Successful deviants acquire techniques and resources necessary to undertake the deviant act and develop mind-set characteristic of others like them. Labeling process can cause harm than good. In many cases the venture of labeling a young person in the plight of a mistake does take a strive on the young person, which forms that point in their life drives that person to continue to view themselves in the wrong manner. Negative labeling can have a positive twist upon the

Several theories have been developed to explain the concept of deviance and crime in the society. They include conflict theory, functional theory, the feminist theory, the labeling theory, control theory, and learning and socialization theory (Clinard & Meier, 2010, p. 74). Conflict theory explains that crime is related to the pluralistic nature of society whereby those in power make rules to protect their interests, the violation of which amounts to crime. Functional theory explains that deviance is part of the social structure and functions as a means of adapting to strains in societal structures. Labeling theory holds that deviance arises from the reaction of the society to a certain behavior. Further, the control theory, on the other hand,

Authors hypotheses were right. The results illustrate that criminal labeling theory does increments criminal behavior. Then, results point out young adults/students that have juvenile justice intervention connects to gang membership and those who don’t. In conclusion, labeling theory indicates that those teenagers that are label can stick to that label since most likely they will get together with others already label that can nourish bad behavior. However, having a label does not mean it will stay with the individual for life, but still can affect the way a teenager will grow up

Marcionis and Plummer (2005) state that labelling theory highlights social response to crime and deviance. The main academics in this theory were Becker and Lemert. Lemert (1951) first established the view of deviant, and later developed by Becker (1963). Labelling theory has become a dominant theory in the explanation of

The way we define and perceive ourselves, shapes our actions, beliefs, and ultimately our identity. However, identity is not just about the self, it also comprehends the social, and that is when labels are created. Labels to point out distinctive characteristics that people show regularly, which oftens leaves people feeling trapped and defined by their given status. Master status has such a strong importance that it could potentially dominate the entire life and idea of personal identity. We can see that happening when a person has a disability and gets identified by it from other people. Saying that a person has autism versus that person is autistic, can make a big difference to a person’s life. Labels are barriers that inhibit and entrap,

Rogers and Buffalo's "Fighting back: Nine modes of adaptation labeling theory" (1974-1975) provides a comprehensive taxonomy of the varied manifestations of labeling in contemporary culture. Prior to outlining the nine modes of labeling theory, the authors issue a framework of traditional labeling theory, including the relationship between labeling theory and deviance and whether labeling reflects more heavily on the labeler or the labelee. This paper considers the ways in which Rogers and Buffalo progress beyond traditional labeling theory and which mode corresponds most closely with traditional labeling theory. The paper then concludes with a detailed examination of how three of the modes manifest in contemporary society, as well as ways in which an understanding of the modes can improve public understanding of the accordant societal issues.

Labeling theory emerged during the mid 1960s and into the early 1970s due to the United States experiencing a rapid social change caused by economic and political conflict. Labeling theory focuses on the role social labeling has on the development of crime and deviance. The theory stresses how an individual who has been labeled as deviant from societal norms might initiate them to continue their involvement in crime and deviance. Deviant behavior can be defined as conduct that is disapproved by the public and is typically subject to some form of sanction. In simpler terms, deviant behavior is socially constructed.

We all read labels, whether it is on a food product or some other item that we want to know more about what is contained within a package. The theory of labeling provides the same information about people, their involvement within daily life, and the ways that they behave. The main arguments within the labeling theory is that we need to as a society focus on the behavior of individuals that are labeling others as oppose to those who are committing crimes. Labeling theory argues that it is these efforts at social control that ultimately trigger the processes that trap individuals in criminal career. (253) This puts forth the idea that the “offender” will be labeled by those within the social environment in which they function within and

The idea of labeling theory is not to define deviance, but rather to complement the idea that deviant behavior can be affected by the views individuals place on those who don’t adhere to societal norms. Labeling theory can also explain personal bias individuals have towards members of society that may stray away from societal norms. An example of this can be seen around heavily religious communities and among deviants who violate the laws of god. The example that comes to my mind based on personal experience living in Utah for the latter half of my life, is the stigma tattoos create. In some cases individuals upon seeing tattoos will either label you a deviant or not depending on their personal societal

Deviant and criminal behavior has become very popular in todays society. Deviance is behavior that violates norms and rules of society, and crime is a type of deviant behavior that violates the formal criminal law. Three sociologists; Edwin Sutherland, Howard Becker, and Travis Hirschi have came up with different theories explaining how socialization contributes to deviant and criminal behavior. There are six different types of sociological theories that contributes to the study of deviance and crime. deviance and criminal behavior vary among communities, societies, and times, and a lot of people wonders how society influences people to act this way.

Due to varying viewpoints and controversy, it is reasonable to question the authenticity of labels and the role they play on socialization. As a result, there has been a plethora of evidence-based research in attempt to explain its origins predating since the 1930s but becoming most prominent in the 1960s as the labeling theory. The great majority of this research links labeling with abnormal or irregular behavior, often coined as ‘deviant’ (Thomson, 2012; Ray & Dollar, 2014). Once this label is attached to an individual, there are ramifications whether positive or negative (Thomson, 2012). For example, an individual labeled ‘felon or criminal’ may forever live a life struggling to find gainful employment, while an individual labeled ‘genius’ may forever receive respect and honor for their opinion and viewpoint. Unfortunately, negative labels, which are more commonly considered, tend to be much more destructive rather than effecting one’s life in a positive manner.