Labeling theory states that people come to identify and behave in ways that reflect how others label them. This theory is most commonly associated with the sociology of crime since labeling someone unlawfully deviant can lead to poor conduct. Describing someone as a criminal, for example, can cause others to treat the person more negatively, and, in turn, the individual acts out.
The idea of labeling theory flourished in American sociology during the 1960s, thanks in large part to sociologist Howard Becker. However, its core ideas can be traced back to the work of founding French sociologist Emile Durkheim. American sociologist George Herbert Mead's theory framing social construction of the self as a process involving interactions with others also influenced its development. Scholars Frank Tannenbaum, Edwin Lemert, Albert Memmi, Erving Goffman, and David Matza played roles in the development and research of labeling theory as well.
Labeling theory is one of the most important approaches to understanding deviant and criminal behavior. It begins with the assumption that no act is intrinsically criminal. Definitions of criminality are established by those in power through the formulation of laws and the interpretation of those laws by police, courts, and correctional institutions. Deviance is therefore not a set of characteristics of individuals or groups but a process of interaction between deviants and non-deviants and the context in which criminality is interpreted.
Police, judges, and educators are the individuals tasked with enforcing standards of normalcy and labeling certain behaviors as deviant in nature. By applying labels to people and creating categories of deviance, these officials reinforce society's power structure. Often, the wealthy define deviancy for the poor, men for women, older people for younger people, and racial or ethnic majority groups for minorities. In other words, society's dominant groups create and apply deviant labels to subordinate groups.
Many children, for example, break windows, steal fruit from other people’s trees, climb into neighbors' yards, or skip school. In affluent neighborhoods, parents, teachers, and police regard these behaviors as typical juvenile behavior. But in poor areas, similar conduct might be viewed as signs of juvenile delinquency. This suggests that class plays an important role in labeling. Race is also a factor.
Research shows that schools discipline Black children more frequently and harshly than white children despite a lack of evidence suggesting that the former misbehave more often than the latter. Similarly, police kill Black people at far higher rates than whites, even when African Americans are unarmed and haven't committed crimes. This disparity suggests that racial stereotypes result in the mislabeling of people of color as deviant.
Once a person is identified as deviant, it is extremely difficult to remove that label. The individual becomes stigmatized as a criminal and is likely to be considered untrustworthy by others. For example, convicts may struggle to find employment after they're released from prison because of their criminal background. This makes them more likely to internalize the deviant label and, again, engage in misconduct. Even if labeled individuals do not commit any more crimes, they must forever live with the consequences of being formally deemed a wrongdoer.
Critics of labeling theory argue that it ignores factors—such as differences in socialization, attitudes, and opportunities—that lead to deviant acts. They also assert that it's not entirely certain whether labeling increases deviancy. Ex-cons might end up back in prison because they have formed connections to other offenders; these ties raise the odds that they will be exposed to additional opportunities to commit crimes. In all likelihood, both labeling and increased contact with the criminal population contribute to recidivism.
- Crime and Community by Frank Tannenbaum (1938)
- Outsiders by Howard Becker (1963)
- The Colonizer and the Colonized by Albert Memmi (1965)
- Human Deviance, Social Problems and Social Control (second edition) by Edwin Lemert (1972)
- Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs by Paul Willis (1977)
- Punished: Policing the Lives of Black and Latino Boys by Victor Rios (2011)
- Without Class: Girls, Race and Women Identity by Julie Bettie (2014)
Home Politics, Law & Government Law, Crime & Punishment
labeling theory, in criminology, a theory stemming from a sociological perspective known as “symbolic interactionism,” a school of thought based on the ideas of George Herbert Mead, John Dewey, W.I. Thomas, Charles Horton Cooley, and Herbert Blumer, among others. The first as well as one of the most prominent labeling theorists was Howard Becker, who published his groundbreaking work Outsiders in 1963. A question became popular with criminologists during the mid-1960s: What makes some acts and some people deviant or criminal? During this time, scholars tried to shift the focus of criminology toward the effects of individuals in power responding to behaviour in society in a negative way; they became known as “labeling theorists” or “social reaction theorists.” In 1969 Blumer emphasized the way that meaning arises in social interaction through communication, using language and symbols. The focus of this perspective is the interaction between individuals in society, which is the basis for meanings within that society. These theorists suggested that powerful individuals and the state create crime by labeling some behaviours as inappropriate. The focus of these theorists is on the reactions of members in society to crime and deviance, a focus that separated them from other scholars of the time. These theorists shaped their argument around the notion that even though some criminological efforts to reduce crime are meant to help the offender (such as rehabilitation efforts), they may move offenders closer to lives of crime because of the label they assign the individuals engaging in the behaviour. As members in society begin to treat these individuals on the basis of their labels, the individuals begin to accept the labels themselves. In other words, an individual engages in a behaviour that is deemed by others as inappropriate, others label that person to be deviant, and eventually the individual internalizes and accepts this label. This notion of social reaction, reaction or response by others to the behaviour or individual, is central to labeling theory. Critical to this theory is the understanding that the negative reaction of others to a particular behaviour is what causes that behaviour to be labeled as “criminal” or “deviant.” Furthermore, it is the negative reaction of others to an individual engaged in a particular behaviour that causes that individual to be labeled as “criminal,” “deviant,” or “not normal.” According to the literature, several reactions to deviance have been identified, including collective rule making, organizational processing, and interpersonal reaction. Becker defined deviance as a social creation in which “social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders.” Becker grouped behaviour into four categories: falsely accused, conforming, pure deviant, and secret deviant. Falsely accused represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behaviour but have been perceived as deviant; therefore, they would be falsely labeled as deviant. Conforming represents those individuals who have engaged in obedient behaviour that has been viewed as obedient behaviour (not been perceived as deviant). Pure deviant represents those individuals who have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behaviour that has been recognized as such; therefore, they would be labeled as deviant by society. Secret deviant represents those individuals who have engaged in rule breaking or deviant behaviour but have not been perceived as deviant by society; therefore, they have not been labeled as deviant. According to sociologists like Emile Durkheim, George Herbert Mead, and Kai T. Erikson, deviance is functional to society and keeps stability by defining boundaries. In 1966 Erikson expanded labeling theory to include the functions of deviance, illustrating how societal reactions to deviance stigmatize the offender and separate him or her from the rest of society. The results of this stigmatization is a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the offenders come to view themselves in the same ways society does. Primary deviance refers to initial acts of deviance by an individual that have only minor consequences for that individual’s status or relationships in society. The notion behind this concept is that the majority of people violate laws or commit deviant acts in their lifetime; however, these acts are not serious enough and do not result in the individual being classified as a criminal by society or by themselves, as it is viewed as “normal” to engage in these types of behaviours. Speeding would be a good example of an act that is technically criminal but does not result in labeling as such. Furthermore, many would view recreational marijuana use as another example.
Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. Subscribe Now
Secondary deviance, however, is deviance that occurs as a response to society’s reaction and labeling of the individual engaging in the behaviour as deviant. This type of deviance, unlike primary deviance, has major implications for a person’s status and relationships in society and is a direct result of the internalization of the deviant label. This pathway from primary deviance to secondary deviance is illustrated as follows:
primary deviance → others label act as deviant → actor internalizes deviant label → secondary deviance
There are three major theoretical directions to labeling theory. They are Bruce Link’s modified labeling, John Braithwaite’s reintegrative shaming, and Ross L. Matsueda and Karen Heimer’s differential social control.