Labeling and Secondary Deviance

Deviance is very much a product of social rulemaking, rule enforcement, and policies regarding the consequence of enforcement (Goode, 2001). Though many theories of what causes deviance have been developed, this report will examine the labeling or interactionist theory of deviance which Goode (2001) describes as focused on rulemaking and, most particularly, reactions to rule-breaking. The goal of the study is to examine the effects of labeling on secondary deviance.

The report will first provide an overview of labeling theory. It will then discuss the nature and sources of secondary deviance. The report will then examine the specific linkages between labeling as a means of defining behavior and the creation of secondary deviance. A limited number of sources will be employed to argue that labeling directly fosters secondary deviance because the individual who enacts deviant behavior may be dealing with the problems created by social reactions to his or her primary deviations (Goode, 2001).

Labeling theory, also known as the interactionist approach to deviance, does not focus on the causes of deviance as such, but rather on how certain behaviors are labeled as deviant in the first place and the ways in which such designations or labels influence future behavior (Pontell, 2002). Labeling theory posits an essentially reactive view of deviance wherein audience responses are viewed as

. . .
ction of deviance" (p. 87). Secondary Deviance Lemert (2002) differentiated between primary and secondary deviation. Primary deviance is conceptualized as the violation of norms stemming from original causes. These causes can be one of a number of social, situational, physiological, and psychological factors. For example, some people may in fact steal because they are hungry and have no money to buy food. Others may become violent because they have abused alcohol or drugs. Still others may engage in behaviors labeled as deviant due to massive emotional stresses such as the loss of a loved one. These primary types of deviance may have few negative consequences as long as the deviance can be tolerated and incorporated into an otherwise non-deviant image (McCaghy, et al, 2000). Should the primary deviance continue unabated and precipitate an adverse reaction from others, it is possible that it could eventually be attributed not to an original cause, but to new problems created by the unfavorable reactions it engenders in an audience (McCaghy, et al, 2000). At this juncture, the deviance becomes secondary. Lemert (2002) contends that "when a person begins to employ his deviant behavior or role based on it as a means
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Deviance Goode, Capron Jamieson, Deviance Lemert, Introduction Deviance, Theory Labeling, Horton Cooley, secondary deviance, According Pontell, labeling theory, et al 2000, mccaghy et al, et al, al 2000, goode 2001, mccaghy et, primary deviance, Prentice Hall, Edwin Lemert, labeled deviant, lemert 2002, deviant behavior, Lemert EM, nj prentice hall, saddle river nj, river nj prentice,
Approximate Word count = 2660
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Labeling and Secondary Deviance