Labeling Theory l Review of Classic Labeling l

Labeling Theory l. Review of “Classic” Labeling l. Reflected Appraisals l. Reintegrative Shaming

The Classic Labeling Process Formal Sanctions Primary Deviance • Most engage in this • Typically sporadic, not serious • Degradation ceremony • Stigmatizing Change in Self-Concept • looking glass self • hard to resist formal label Secondary Deviance • Caused by new self-image as criminal or deviant

Criticisms of Labeling 1. Typically history of antisocial behavior prior to formal labeling ¡ Society 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. . .

Matsueda (1992) l Reflected Appraisals, Parental Labeling, and Delinquency ¡ Move from formal to informal labels (appraisals) ¡ Back to “symbolic interactionism” roots l Much more complex, rich ¡ Allows early deviance to play a role ¡ Difference between actual appraisals, reflected appraisals, and self-appraisals

Formation of the “self” l Transactions ¡ Interactions ¡ between 2 or more individuals “Role-taking” appraising from others’ shoes: The situation l Oneself in the situation l Possible lines of action l

Role-taking as socialization l Early socialization ¡ Take the role of significant others who are present in situations l Later socialization ¡ Take the role of “generalized other, ” or the whole social group

Elements of the “self” l How others actually see you ¡ Actual l How Appraisals you perceive the way others see you ¡ Reflected l How Appraisals you see yourself ¡ Self-Appraisals

Matsueda’s Model Initial Behaviors Reflected Appraisals of Others Behavior Actual Appraisal by Others

John Braithwaite l Austrailian Criminologist l Crime, Shame, and Reintegration l Pretty complex theory (Not parsimonious) ¡ BUT, Central concepts are not that complex Reintegrative Shaming vs. Stigmatization l Interdependency l Communitarianism l

What is “shaming? ” l Behaviors (from others) that induce guilt, shame ¡ snide comment, verbal confrontations ¡ stocks/pillory, the “scarlet letter” ¡ Naval tradition of “captains mask” l In Western society, shaming has become uncoupled from formal punishment ¡ Offenders privately sent away to warehouses by corrections or court “officials”

Braithwaite II l Interdependency ¡ “attachment” with social others (indirect control at micro level) l Communitarianism ¡ l similar to “collective efficacy” (control at macro) In communities that lack collective efficacy, and among people who are less bonded, stigmatizing punishment is likely.

Types of “Shaming” l Reintegrative ¡ ¡ Love the sinner, hate the sin Spank the child, but tell them that you still love them l Stigmatizing ¡ ¡ ¡ no effort made to reconcile the offender with the community offender as outcast, “criminal” as master status degradation ceremonies not followed by ceremonies to “decertify” deviance

Examples of Shaming l Stigmatizing ¡ United States ¡ Court, prison, etc. (remove and shun from community) l Reintegrative ¡ Japan ¡ Ceremonies to shame and welcome back

The Model Interdependency Communitarianism (MICRO) (MACRO) Type of Punishment • Reintegrative Shaming • Stigmatizing Legitimate Opportunities Criminal Subculture High Crime

Evidence for Reintegrative Shameing? l Japan vs. U. S. crime rates ¡ Since WWII, Japan U. S. (others) l Why? ¡ High Interdependency and Communitarianism ¡ Reintegrative Shaming emphasized ¡ Community has duty to shame and welcome back transgressors

Implications of Braithwaite? l Restorative ¡ Emphasis on “repairing harm” l l ¡ Justice Punishment alone is not effective in changing behavior and is disruptive to community harmony and good relationships Restitution as a means of restoring both parties; goal of reconciliation and restoration Community involvement l l Crime control the domain of the community Community as facilitator in restorative process Crime has social dimensions of responsibility Victims are central to the process of resolving a crime