chapter 5 interactionalist

Interactionists believe that crime and deviance is behaviour that has been negatively labelled by society. They believe there is no such thing as a deviant act. An act only becomes deviant when it’s perceived (and labelled) as such.

Labelling Theories

Most theories on crime place an emphasis on the social factors (poverty, subcultural values) that may lead to delinquency (e.g. functionalism). Interactionists take a different approach. They argue that no act is inherently criminal or deviant in itself, in all institutions and at all times. Instead, it only comes to be so when others label it as such. In other words, it is not the nature of the act that makes it deviant, but the nature of society’s reaction to the act. Deviance therefore is a social construct.

Interactionists explore four core areas:

· How and why certain acts are defined as deviant?

· Whom does society label?

· The Effects of labelling – the importance of Societal Reaction.

· Labelling Theory and Social Policy.

1. How and why certain acts are defined as deviant

Labelling theorists began exploring how and why certain acts were defined as criminal or deviant and why other such acts were not. They questioned how people became defined as criminal or deviant based on their behaviour and circumstances.

Interactionists view criminals not as evil individuals who engaged in wrong acts, but as individuals who had a criminal status placed upon them by both the criminal justice system and the community. From this point of view, the criminal act is itself not significant for Interactionists. Their focus is on the social reaction to the act: labelling and the self-fulfilling prophecy.

i) Definition of Deviance – Becker

Becker suggests that there is no such thing as a deviant act. An act only becomes deviant when others perceive and define it as such. He uses the example of nudity in western society. Nudity in the bedroom is generally perceived as normal behaviour, however if a stranger were to enter then the nudity would usually be considered as deviant. Yet in particular contexts, such as nudist camps, nudity in the presence of a stranger would be seen as perfectly normal.

Whether or not the label is applied will depend on how the act is interpreted by the audience. This is turn will depend on who commits the act, when and where it is committed, who observes the act, and the negotiations between the various actors involved in the interaction situation

Becker therefore argues that the social construction of deviance requires two activities. One group which lacks power and acts in a particular way. Another group, with more power responds negatively to it and defines and labels it as criminal. A deviant is simply someone to whom a label has been successfully applied, and deviant behaviour is simply behaviour that people have labelled as such.

Becker notes that the agents of social control are made up of groups who make up the criminal justice system such as the police and judges. They work on behalf of politically powerful groups to label and thus define the behaviour of less powerful groups as being a problem. Consequently, the behaviour of the less powerful is subjected to greater surveillance and control by these social agencies.

New Criminologist Gilroy would support the work of Becker as he examined the relationship between crime, ethnicity and the police. He argued that the agencies of social control such as the police and courts label black working class youth as potential criminals. By targeting and arresting them disproportionality, a myth is created that black males are more likely to be criminals

Evaluation

1.Ackers suggests that individuals may simply choose to be deviant, regardless of whether they have been labelled or not. Labelling does not cause most terrorists to turn to crime: they are motivated by their political beliefs to break the law. These individuals are not passive and accepting of the label, instead they are fighting back against society. Right Realist Wilson would support this in stating that crime is linked to a person’s rational choice.

2.Fuller describes how not everyone accepts negative stereotypes of themselves. Within an educational context, black girls channelled their anger about being negatively labelled into the pursuit of educational success. They worked hard, but gave the appearance of not doing so, showing a deliberate lack of concern about school routines. They had a positive attitude to academic success but not to the school itself, refusing to join any sports or drama clubs. They respected themselves, but not the school or its teachers.

2. Who does society label?

Not everyone who commits an offence is punished for it. Whether a person is arrested, charged and convicted depends on factors such as:

· Their appearance, background (social class?) and personal biography

· The situations and circumstances of the offence.

· Their interaction with agencies of social control such as the police and courts.

This leads Interactionists to look at how the laws are applied and enforced. Their studies show that agencies of social control are more likely to label certain groups of people as deviant or criminal.

i) Negotiation – Cicourel

For Cicourel, justice isn’t fixed it’s negotiable. In his study of two Californian cities, Cicourel tries to discover how and why the label of ‘deviant’ is applied to particular individuals. Cicourel argues that the process of defining a person as a delinquent is not simple and unproblematic - rather it is complex, involving a series of interactions, based on meanings held by participants, which can be modified during the interaction, making each stage in the process negotiable.

Cicourel identifies two stages in this process:

· The first stage consists of a decision by the police to stop and interrogate an individual. This will be based on stereotypes held by the police of a 'typical delinquent' and of what constitutes 'suspicious' behaviour.

· The second stage consists of whether to charge the individual (likely to be a youth) or not. This will be based on the stereotypes held by the juvenile officer of a typical delinquent. It will also be based on the power of the youth's parents to be able to successfully negotiate with the police. Middle class parents can more successfully convince the officer that for example, their son has a rosy future, is really quite co-operative and remorseful over his actions. Working class parents lack this power. In Cicourel’s study, the middle-class males who found themselves arrested for criminal behaviour were usually ‘counselled, cautioned and released’. Hence, the working class child is recorded in the statistics and the middle class child is not.

Feminist Campbell would support the work of Cicourel as she also looks at the notion of negotiation with her research on ‘chivalry theory’. Campbell states that females are more likely to negotiate their way out of criminal acts and be treated more leniently by the police.

Evaluation

1. Arguably, this theory could be seen as being too deterministic as not all police officers label in this way. The police force today is more diverse and officers are provided with training to avoid stereotypical labelling and arrests. Plus it is difficult to compare police practices in the USA to the UK.

2. Statistics do often support the fact that people from low socio-economic groups and ethnic minorities do commit proportionately more crime yet Marxists would suggest that Cicourel fails to explain why the police see the ‘typical delinquent’ as coming from a low income family, he fails to look at who has the power in society and how the possession of power might influence the definition of crime and deviance.

3. The Effects of Labelling & Societal Reaction

Interactionists are interested in the effects of labelling upon those who are labelled. They claim that by labelling certain people as criminal or deviant, society actually encourages them to become more so.

i) Folk Devils & Moral Panics – S. Cohen

Cohen argues that from time to time agents of social control such as prominent members of the police, courts, editors of newspapers, politicians whip up a moral panic - i.e. a particular type of activity or a group of people is/are defined as a threat to society.

The deviants who have been labelled and isolated in this way are defined as folk devils and can normally expect to experience the wrath of 'respectable' society e.g. pedophile’s, knife crime. Cohen's work has clearly been influenced by Becker, in particular, how a group of individuals come to be defined as deviant which in turn leads to them being socially positioned as outsiders in society.

The ‘Mods’ and ‘Rockers’

Cohen argues that the Mods and Rockers were only subcultures consisting of groups of youths with different clothing until the media exaggerated the events of a Bank Holiday weekend in Clacton in 1964.

The process of deviance amplification began after a few scuffles broke out on Easter Sunday 1964. The press exaggerated the events principally because there had been few actual world-wide incidents that weekend and there was a desperate need for a main story.

· The press used terms such as ‘riot’ and ‘battle’ to describe what were really only minor events. It was this overreaction which led to the public identification of two types of gang, ‘mods’ and ‘rockers’ when there really was no such original distinction in the first place.

· The press then predicted where future battles would take place, and so youths accordingly went down to the south coast and joined in the fun.

· The press increasingly became more hostile toward the youths and attacked their clothes and hairstyles. They were increasingly isolated as folk devils. By exaggerating the concerns and fears of the agencies of social control, a moral panic was created.

In short, the media amplified the problem by creating a moral panic which heightened police activity, court sentencing and public awareness. This became a vicious spiral which had little resemblance to the actual situation.

Evaluation

1. McRobbie and Thornton would question whether audiences are this passive, and that they simply accept what they are being told alongside a plurality of mediums. The audience can turn against the media, and reject its views, for example the News of the World phone-hacking scandal.

2. Gouldner has criticised Cohen for presenting too much of a ‘sociology of the underdog’ in that he appears to side with the youths against the forces of social control. New Right Realists support zero tolerance policing, and do not believe there are excuses for young delinquents and criminal behaviour

ii) Effects of Social Reaction – Lemert

Lemert focuses on such a concept. He distinguishes between primary and secondary deviance.

· Primary deviance consists of deviant acts before they are publicly labelled. Most of us, at one time or another, have engaged in deviant acts such as petty theft, vandalism or some form of delinquency or even more minor forms of deviance. These acts are not part of an organised deviant way of life, so offenders can easily rationalise them away, for example as a ‘moment of madness’. Generally speaking, these acts have little effect on our identity or our status in society.

· Secondary deviance, by contrast, refers to deviant acts which result from being publicly labelled deviant. Being caught and publicly labelled as a criminal can involve being stigmatised and excluded from mainstream society. Such acts may well have dramatic implications for the individual’s identity and status in society. Those labelled are marked out and given a negative master status by mainstream society. Rejected and labelled, they may embark on a deviant career. The important factor, therefore, in creating deviant acts, is the reaction of society.

Evaluation

1. Lemert’s work does not help explain why people continue to commit criminal acts despite not being labelled by the public i.e. the pickpocket who has never been caught.

2. It is suggested that his work on the effects of labelling theory is too deterministic. He assumes that once a person has been labelled, their deviance will automatically increase. However, there are cases of people convicted of crimes who are rehabilitated, and move on to lead a positive lifestyle.

iii) Labelling Marijuana Users - Young

The concept of secondary deviance and deviant career is developed by Young in his study of hippie marijuana users in London (1971).

He notes how marijuana users were forced into a closed group due to the over-reaction of the police. The police held negative stereotypes of hippies who they saw as scruffy, dirty, idle scroungers. The police particularly tried to clamp down on their use of marijuana.

Previously, marijuana use took place simply at parties as part of their socialising, and was not the main reason for meeting. However, overreaction by the police forced drug users to meet behind closed doors and so what had been a peripheral activity became the main reason for meeting.

Consequently, the hippies began to view themselves as a deviant group so they deliberately set up a subculture as a sign of defiance with its own norms, values and fashion. The drug culture therefore made it difficult to re-enter society because they were seen as different or as outsiders. In short, police over-reaction created a more significant problem and a distinct subculture.

Evaluation

1. Young’s work ignores the fact that stereotypically this subculture was made up of middle class students. The fact that they were negatively labelled by the police, contradicts Cicourel’s theory of negotiation and power. They should have been able to get out of the labelling process because of their class position.

2. Gouldner criticised Young for taking sides with the students against the police, another case of ‘sociology of the underdog’. He also seems to be denying the fact that in taking marijuana the students were committing a criminal act when they were clearly breaking the law.

4. Labelling Theory and Criminal Justice Policy

i) Punishment & Policy - Jones

Jones identifies two main policy implications as a result of labelling. He believes we should:

· Decriminalise as many types of behaviour as possible. For example, in countries such as Holland, cannabis has been legalised. If it’s no longer a crime there are no longer criminals. As Interactionists believe the label of criminal leads to further law breaking behaviour, if we have fewer laws to break, there will be fewer people labelled, leading to a reduction in secondary deviance.

· Jones suggests that when the law has to intervene, it should avoid giving people a self-concept in which they view themselves as criminals. For example, a system of warnings or cautions could be used to deal with delinquents, and prison should be a last resort.

Evaluation

1. Jones is heavily criticised by Right Realists as they believe that decriminalising crime such as marijuana usage is playing into the hands of the underclass. They support zero tolerance policing.

2. Right Realists would further criticise Jones for supporting a decline in the country’s moral values. They would not want to see decriminalisation of drug use or prostitution at any cost as they support only traditional family values.

ii) Reintegrative and Disintegrative Shaming – Braithwaite

Braithwaite argued that labelling could have a positive effect on crime, and as a result could lead to a reduction in society’s crime rates. He suggested that there are two possible outcomes of labelling depending on how it’s implemented:

· Disintegrative shaming: the crime and the criminal are labelled as bad and the offender excluded from society. Braithwaite saw that as negative and leading to secondary deviance.

· Re-integrative shaming: by labelling the act and not the actor for example “he has done a bad thing” rather than “he is a bad person”, we can avoid self-fulfilling prophecy and reduce the rate of secondary deviance.

He argued that where there is more re-integrative shaming, society will have lower rates of criminality as this avoids stigmatising the offender, yet makes them aware of the negative impact of their actions on others. This encourages others to forgive criminal behaviour and accept the person back into society.

Evaluation

1.Left Realists believe that there has also been a rise of a culture of too much sympathy for the criminals and not enough for the victim. They feel society’s focus should be on victims of crime and the impact criminality has had on them.

2. Braithwaite’s accounts are simply not accurate as statistics show high rates of reoffending, particularly amongst young offenders, despite efforts at re-integrative shaming.