Slide 1

Process Theory ContinuedReviewLabeling TheorySocial Support TheoryReviewProcess TheoriesDifferential Association/Social LearningTheories (Sutherland, Akers)EvidencePolicy ImplicationsInformal Social Control Theories Types of control Theories (Hirschi, Gottfreodson and Hirschi, Sampson and Laub)EvidencePolicy ImplicationsConnections/Organization

3Gottfredson and HirschiSampson and LaubExtension of Hirschis social bond theoryAge gradedAdult social bondsQuality MarriageQuality JobWhy matter!Sampson and LaubContextParenting Supervision Discipline Social Bonds Family SchoolDelinquent PeersChildhoodAdolescenceAdulthoodIndividual DifferencesDelinquencySocial BondsMarriageGood JobLength ofIncarcerationAdult CrimeControl vs. LearningA product of sociological criminology (Hirschi)The distinction is based on assumptions about human nature: What is the nature of human beings inSocial Learning Theory?Social Control/Deterrence Theory?Strain/Anomie Theory? Distinctions are not really important in psychologyOperant conditioning, vicarious learning, cognitive psychology are all grounded in principles of learning

Labeling Theory Developed by Frank Tannenbaum, Edwin Lemert, and Howard BeckerKey conceptsEmphasis is on interactions between individuals and institutions of formal control (e.g., police, courts, prisons).Contact with police and the courts may create negative self-image. Formal interventions may increase criminal behavior.8Roots of the Labeling Perspective (1 of 3) View of crime and deviance as relative No act is inherently evil, bad, or criminal. Deviant categorization depends on many factorsWhen/where the act is committedWho the offender is Who the victim is What the consequences are 9Roots of the Labeling Perspective (2 of 3) Focus on how power and conflict shape society (social context)Moral entrepreneursPowerful groups define and react to deviant behaviorBenefits powerful, can hurt the less powerfulCriminal justice system: agents enforce the law in the interest of powerful groups10Roots of the Labeling Perspective (3 of 3) Importance of self-conceptSymbolic interactionism People communicate through symbols.People interpret symbolic gestures and incorporate them into their self-image.Looking-glass selfDeveloped by Charles Horton CooleyOnes own self-concepts are the product of other peoples conceptions or symbolic labels Self-fulfilling prophesy11

12A Critique of Labeling Theory Little empirical supportInaccurate assumptionsPrimary deviance as relative, sporadic, and unimportantNature of the person predicts official reaction more than the nature of the actEffect of official sanctions on future behaviorRacial bias does existbut not sole (or most important) cause of CJ response to crimeArrest sometimes decreases future crime13Policy Implications:Labeling Theory Policy implicationsSchur: Radical noninterventionJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (1974)Diversion programs Divert offenders away from the formal juvenile justice processing to programs run by other entities (i.e., social service programs)Deinstitutionalization (esp. status offenders)Due Process revolution in Juvenile Court 14Labeling Theory in ContextLabeling theory most popular in 1960s-1970sThe central ideas had been around as early as the 1930sGood fit for the social context of 1960sIronic TwistGovernment, trying to do good, actually makes people worseGood fit with the cant trust the government social movement eraLabeling Theory Extensions ILawrence Shermans Defiance Theory Police sanctions canProduce defiance (escalation in offending)Produce deterrence (decrease in offending)Be irrelevantReintegrative shaming16Labeling Extensions IIReintegrative Shaming Developed by John BraithewaiteEffect of formal punishment depends upon how a person is punished. Shaming and reintegrative punishment will decrease future crime. Stigmatizing punishment will increase future crime. 17Policy Implication of Reintegrative ShamingRestorative JusticeGoal of the criminal justice system: to repair the harm created by the offenseVictim central to processCommunity volunteers also importantPunishment of offender does little to repair harm (inflicting pain not really accountability). 18Policy Implications: Reintegrated Shaming (2 of 2) Empirical researchVictim-offender mediationRestitutionSentencing circlesMixed findingsCriticismLimited (depends on voluntary participation)Might reduce funding to more effective rehabilitation programs19Social Support Theory Newcomer to the theory world (mid 1990s)Francis CullenDeterrence/control view of human nature is too simplisticSocial Support as precondition for effective parenting (control)Social Support independently importantAltruism

Conclusion Deviant behavior is the result of individuals interacting with social institutions over time.Social control theory: inadequate socializationDifferential association/social learning theory: improper socializationLabeling theory: socialized to accept delinquent identity (interaction with the criminal justice system)Not well supported by researchRevisions (e.g., informal labeling, reintegrative shaming) more promising 21Review of Theories for Exam IISocial StructureAnomie/StrainSocial Disorganization

Social ProcessLearningControlLabeling