Social Labeling Theory

521 Words2 Pages

Labeling theory was created by a small group of researchers in the 1960s. This theory considers that people commit crimes when they labeled as criminal and take this label as their personal identity. Main approaches of this theory are primary and secondary deviance, labeling and being stigmatized. Primary deviance refers to experiences of deviant behavior that the people associate with. Secondary deviance is when someone makes a profit from that deviant behavior society gives him/her a negative social label, and this label changes the person’s social identity. This negative label is called as “stigma”. For example, a teenager who lives in an urban area as known as gangs neighborhood may be labeled as a gang member. As a result, , the …show more content…

People behave toward things according to their meanings for them. The capability of humans to pinpoint something to themselves in their vicinity guides the achievability of meaning. People in any status are confined by infinite characteristics of their vicinity, but just some of these characteristics are meaningful. The things differentiate from the surrounding may be material things or sounds or gestures or smells .The people notes these and improve and understanding of them and decides how to proceed. So, basically, the individual define these things as symbols with meanings and uses them to act. b. The meaning of things proceed with social interaction with one’s friend/companion. Things do not have hereditary meanings within themselves, the meaning is socially developed, with experiences with the one’s interactions with other people in society. For example, if a person does not know a specific language, the sounds of this language does not have any meaning for the individual, they are just sounds. There may be two issues arise.First, it may be difficult for person as part of the society in which the symbols were created and used to understand them. Second, even though the meaning of the symbol is likely to be created based on common understandings, there may not be general approval regarding to the aim of the

Open Document