Social explanations of crime (Labelling and self fulfilling prophecy)
Teacher recommended
?- Created by: jaaaz_v
- Created on: 03-11-16 20:17
View mindmap
- Labelling and SFP
- Labelling is when we classify individuals and treat them accordingly
- Negative connotations with being labelled though in theory someone could be labelled positively
- May not reflect the true nature of the individual
- Can be linked with stigmas
- can lead to generalized and oversimplified views
- linked to stereotypes
- 2 types of labelling
- Retrospective - interpreting someones past in light of present deviance. Eg saying that a murderer used to be violent
- projective labelling is uding deviant identity to predict future actions. Eg, saying an aggressive person will g on to be a murderer
- "SPF is the process by which one persons expectations about another become reality by eliciting behaviours that confirm the expectations
- Rosenthal & Jacobson (1968)
- Tests of general ability given to children and teachers were told they could predict academic "blooming"
- Teachers were made to believe that some children would end the year in high achievement
- Teachers informed of those who got top 20% (made up)
- at the end of the year, children were retested
- those marked as ready to bloom showed greater gains than those not labelled in this way
- Jahoda (1954)
- Wanted to see if the day a child is born could effect what they turned out like
- Based on Soul names and the idea that the day a child is born affects their temperament
- Mondays boys are placid and Wednesday boys are believed to be violent and aggressive
- Over a five year period 22% of the violent offences recorded in court were committed by boys with Wednesday names whereas Mondays boys were only 6.9%
- Basemer et al (2013)
- Children of convicted parents were shown to have a higher risk of conviction
- Official bias
- Factors like convicted parents, low family income, poor housing etc can be used to label a family as "criminal"
- Could be other explanations for the child being convicted such as social learning theory
- + such families are paid attention to more so are more likely to be caught and prosecuted
- Gender differences
- Boyd and girls experience different socialisation. Girls tend to be supervised more while boys are encouraged to take more risks.
- May be less clear with modern changes in society
- Carlen (1990) found evidence that males and females may be labelled differently. Interviewed convicted female offenders and found that women turn to crime when it makes sense to do so, rather than going against social norms
- Heidensohn (1985) found that females conform to social norms more than males, suggesting that males are more likely to engage in criminal behavior than females
- Ramoutar & Farrington (2006) interviewed male and female prisoners in trinidad about their offending
- Found that both genders were affected by labelling
- Negative labelling by parents, police etc. affected participation in violent crime (but not frequently)
- Females were affected much more than males by negative labels from their parents
- Boyd and girls experience different socialisation. Girls tend to be supervised more while boys are encouraged to take more risks.
- Labelling is when we classify individuals and treat them accordingly
Comments
Report