Crim Exam 2- Labelling Theory and Rational Choice Theory

Roots of the Theory

1922 Frank Tannenbaum “Wall Shadows: A Study of American Prisons” - people labelled criminal tend to internalize and act accordingly

1927 Thrasher - “The Gang” - CHICAGO SCHOOL —> wanted to know how gangs were formed and concluded they come from kid play groups, those groups engage in minor deviance, POLICE INTERVENTION/CRACKDOWN leads the group to see themselves in opposition to the police

but it REALLY developed in the 1950s/60s

Types of deviance (Lemert)

primary —> occurs randomly (no real motivation)

secondary —> occurs as a REACTION to being labelled as “a criminal” (more serious)

label as dependent variable (effect)

“What factors (other than legal ones) result in someone being labelled?” :

race, intensity of crime, priors (police discretion)

ATTEMPTS TO EXPLAIN WHY CERTAIN BEHAVIOR IS SOCIALLY DEFINED AS WRONG

label as independent variable (cause)

looking at someone who was labelled and seeing how that impacted their lives/behavior

What Sociological principle are both components of labelling theory derived from?

Symbolic interactionism!

(dependent: behavior is interpretable {nothing inherently bad in behavior, only how we define it} over perception vs covert meaning —> characteristics of others can be seen as symbolic of danger [arrests can be made based on these] )

Reflected appraisal / looking glass self

we look for how people act toward us and that’s how we interpret ourselves

self-fulfilling prophecy

like bad manifestation

Critique of labelling theory:

• not testable hypotheses

• failed to specify mediating factors

• and conditioning factors

Research:

does NOT support the independent side (so theory falls to wayside in 70s)

little empirical evidence:

future deviance infrequently happens exclusively because of the label

—> no or very weak evidence of direct labelling effects

1980s revival

Bruce Link pushed labelling’s impact on LIFE CHANCES (an intervening variable)

the label will impact one’s chances/opportunities and with a negative label those opportunities decrease, thus potentially leading to a life of crime

Sampson and Lab Research

Examined impact of incarceration length on job stability

(the longer the sentence, the less stable)

Rochester Youth Development Study (labelling research)

• series of studies (3) funded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

• oversampled males (intentional, but a mistake)

• it is now a 3 generational study (and a parent’s label will effect their child)

• RACE MAGNIFIED THE LABELLING EFFECT ON JOBS (conditioning factors)

other factors that might influence the impact of official intervention

SOCIAL SUPPORT -

expressive —> feel good/emotional (from a parent to a child)

instrumental —→ financial support a parent might lend their grown child

gang members view official intervention

differently

Radical non-intervention

better to tolerate minor infractions than encourage future more severe ones