1 “Classic” Labeling Reintegrative Shaming Defiance Theory Labeling Theory“Classic” LabelingReintegrative ShamingDefiance Theory
2 The Social Context of Labeling Many “early writings”Lemert in 1950sTannenbaum in 1938Emerged in the 1960s as a forceSocial context of the 1960s“Fit” with the theoryLabeling theory = “ironic twist”
3 Labeling as a mix of 3 perpectives Symbolic InteractionismGestures/signs to communicateA single “label” can have many meanings or “baggage”Identity (self), “master status,” etcConflict TheoryHow the law is created and appliedCrime as “Constructed”All deviance is relative (no absolute evils)
4 The Classic Labeling Process Formal SanctionsDegradation ceremonyStigmatizingChange in Self-Conceptlooking glass selfhard to resist formal labelPrimary DevianceMost engage in thisTypically sporadic, not seriousSecondary DevianceCaused by new self-image as criminal or deviant
5 Criticisms of Labeling 1. Typically history of antisocial behavior prior to formal labelingSociety doesn’t “identify, tag, and sanction individuals as deviant in a vacuum.”2. Controlling initial levels of deviance, formal sanctions have little (no?) effect.3. No “negotiation,” obsession with “formal” sanctions...
6 Policy Implications (The 4 Ds) DiversionDe-institutionalizationDecriminalizationDue ProcessHow all relate to labelingActually part of OJJDP dialogue and policy in the 1970s (irony here)Jerome Miller Last One Over the Wall
7 John Braithwaite Austrailian Criminologist Crime, Shame, and ReintegrationPretty complex theory (Not parsimonious)BUT, Central concepts are not that complexReintegrative Shaming vs. StigmatizationInterdependencyCommunitarianism
8 What is “shaming?”Behaviors (from others) that induce guilt, shamesnide comment, verbal confrontationsstocks/pillory, the “scarlet letter”Naval tradition of “captains mask”In Western society, shaming has become uncoupled from formal punishmentOffenders privately sent away to warehouses by corrections or court “officials”
9 Braithwaite II Interdependency Communitarianism “attachment” with social others (indirect control at micro level)Communitarianismsimilar to “collective efficacy” (control at macro)In communities that lack collective efficacy, and among people who are less bonded, stigmatizing punishment is likely.
10 Types of “Shaming” Reintegrative Stigmatizing Love the sinner, hate the sinSpank the child, but tell them that you still love themStigmatizingno effort made to reconcile the offender with the communityoffender as outcast, “criminal” as master statusdegradation ceremonies not followed by ceremonies to “decertify” deviance
11 Examples of Shaming Stigmatizing Reintegrative United States Court, prison, etc. (remove and shun from community)ReintegrativeJapanCeremonies to shame and welcome back
12 The Model Interdependency (MICRO) Communitarianism (MACRO) Type of PunishmentReintegrative ShamingStigmatizingLegitimate OpportunitiesCriminal SubcultureHigh Crime
13 Evidence for Reintegrative Shaming? Japan vs. U.S. crime ratesSince WWII, Japan U.S.(others)Why?High Interdependency and CommunitarianismReintegrative Shaming emphasizedCommunity has duty to shame and welcome back transgressors
14 Implications of Braithwaite? Restorative JusticeEmphasis on “repairing harm”Punishment alone is not effective in changing behavior and is disruptive to community harmony and good relationshipsRestitution as a means of restoring both parties; goal of reconciliation and restorationCommunity involvementCrime control the domain of the communityCommunity as facilitator in restorative processCrime has social dimensions of responsibilityVictims are central to the process of resolving a crime
15 Lawrence Sherman “Defiance Theory” “the net increase in the prevalence, incidence, or seriousness of the future offending against a sanctioning community caused by a proud, shameless reaction to the administration of a criminal sanction.”
16 What causes defiance? Sanctions are defined as “unfair” Sanctioning agent behaves with disrespect for the offender or his/her groupThe sanction is actually unfair (discriminatory, excessive, undeserved) – COPSOffender is poorly bonded to sanctioning agent or communityBorrowed from social bond theoryHostile reaction the labeling theory irony again (getting tough produces opposite reaction)