Major Theories of Deviance

Major Theories of Deviance

Society plays a vital role in establishing social norms, including the informal rules and formal legal laws essential in distinguishing what is good from what is bad and what is legal from what is illegal. The society also provides sanctions and punishments that include certain reactions to those who fail to conform to the set social norms (Goode, 2015). People are social, and their behavior is constructed through social interactions. Major deviant theories include the differential association theory and the labeling theories, and their applications in deviance in society are evident. Both theories illustrate a connection between deviant behavior and social associations.

Additionally, the generalist practice and crisis interventions as applicable social intervention work to help victims of deviance are widely discussed. Generalist practice involves working with all the human systems, including the individual, in order to change the social conditions faced by the victims and promote the well-being of society. Crisis intervention helps mentally distressed victims by empathizing and listening to them while assessing the situation to come up with a possible solution.

Introduction

Deviant theories illustrate a connection between deviant behavior and social associations. Major deviant theories include the differential association theory and the labeling theories, and their applications in deviance in society are evident. Sutherland’s differential association majors its hypothesis that every person experiences both criminal and non-criminal associations. Whether or not a person becomes an offender depends on which association outweighs the other. Additionally, the labeling theory by Herbert suggests that deviant label judgments induce discrimination and stigma, which subsequently trigger or worsen deviant behavior. Accordingly, two major deviant theories include the differential association theory and the labeling theories, which indicate the connection between society and deviant behavior.

Differential Association Theory

Edwin Sutherland introduced the differential association theory of deviance in 1939. He proposed that individuals learn behaviors by interacting with others. Through this interaction, individuals learn the values, techniques, attitudes, and motives for committing a crime (Casella, 2020). Sutherland argued that every person experiences criminal and non-criminal associations. One chooses to follow a path of criminality if the criminal associations outweigh the non-criminal associations, resulting in offending behavior (TRS Psychology, n.d.). Additionally, the reinforcement of this tendency is reinforced if the social associations involve the provision of active people in the person’s life.

The Main Ideas

Sutherland summarized his differential association theory into nine key principles. Firstly, he proposed that crime is learned; secondly, the offending behavior is learned through interaction with other deviant persons. Third, this learning takes place within personal and intimate groups. For example, individuals are more likely to learn criminal behavior from people of high status in their lives, such as parents, family, and friends. Fourth, learning criminal behavior involves learning the values, rationalizations, attitudes, motives, and techniques for committing the crime. For instance, when learning a criminal behavior like stealing cars, the rationalizations and techniques such as picking a lock and getting rid of the number plates are learned.

Fifth, the motives and their specific directions are learned by defining legal laws as favorable or unfavorable. The individuals learn how to define laws in a manner that provides justifications for committing crimes. Sixth, an individual becomes a criminal if the definitions favorable to violation of legal laws outweigh the unfavorable definitions of violation of legal codes. Seventh, the learning process is different in individuals, and the associations vary in duration, frequency, priority, and intensity. Eighth, the mechanisms for learning criminal behavior during criminal and non-criminal associations are similar to those involved in any other learning in life. Deviant behavior, such as rudeness, is learned similarly to learning non-deviant behavior, like politeness. Finally, Sutherland argued that ‘need’ does not explain or does not provide enough reason for criminal behavior since the same needs and values express non-criminal behavior. For instance, a criminal in need of food might decide to shoplift some stuff in a convenience store, while a non-criminal might ask for a job in the store in exchange for some foodstuff.

Application in Explaining Deviance

The main proposal of this theory is that behavior, deviant behavior as well, is learned through interactions with other persons. For instance, a student can learn how to cheat in exams by associating with other deviant peers in school. The deviant behavior is especially reinforced when the association involves intimate and personal groups like a best friend. The rationalizations and motives for cheating in an exam are learned during the interactions by attaining high grades and getting rewards and techniques involved in doing so.

Labeling Theory

George Herbert Mead created the labeling theory in the 1960s. This theory is related to social construction and symbolic-interaction analysis, and its main focus is on the tendency of the majority to negatively label the minority or the individuals that deviate from the standard social norms. Herbert assumed that although various causes and conditions influence deviance, individuals labeled as deviants often face reactions from others and self and negative stereotypes that, in turn, cause stigma due to the deviant label (Krohn, Hendrix, Lizotte, and Hall, 2019).

The Main Ideas

The negative stereotypes and stigma that stem from labeling worsen the deviant behavior and make it more stable and chronic. Lermet, in 1967, stated that the means of attack, defense, and adaptation to the problems created by negative labeling is deviant behavior. Thus, labeling others as deviants may reinforce and stabilize deviance, the behavioral patterns, and socio-psychological conditions that existed before the labeling process (Krohn, Hendrix, Lizotte, and Hall, 2019).

Furthermore, any past and future account of misbehavior by labeled persons is indicated as essentially their nature of criminality. Also, society tends to set aside the labeled deviants as fundamentally different and consider them as persons with undesirable characteristics. Other attributes, including a person’s good attributes, may be overridden due to the negative stereotypes and images attached to the deviant label.

The processes of criminality triggered by deviant labeling include deviant self-concept, the process of self-exclusion and withdrawal/rejection from society, and association with deviant groups. Once individuals are marked as deviant or as criminals, they may change their self-perception, see themselves as criminals, and take the role of the deviant in society. Since people are socially constructed, their self-concept is formed through interactions with others, and they learn who they are based on the attitudes of others towards themselves. For instance, a student labeled as a good student will tend to submit assignments on time and basically do everything by the book in order to fulfill the expectations that stem from the ‘good student’ label. Similarly, deviant labels influence an individual’s behavior. Since they are negative, the labeled individual may grow stereotypical expectations about themselves and, in turn, take on the role of the deviant.

As discussed above, deviant labeling results in problems such as negative stereotypes and stigma. Society often discriminates against labeled individuals due to the negative images attached to deviant labeling. Labeled individuals experience negative reactions from others, such as fear and mistrust. Essentially, the conforming members of society exclude themselves from the labeled person (Goode, 2016). Also, the labeled person feels devalued, embarrassed, and stigmatized and may withdraw themselves from social interactions due to expected rejection.

Finally, once an individual is rejected and withdraws themselves from social interactions, they may associate themselves with deviant groups in society. The person feels accepted in such groups as they provide support. The deviant groups also provide rationalizations and attitudes for committing a crime and provide opportunities that encourage deviant behavior (Krohn, Hendrix, Lizotte, and Hall, 2019).

Application in Explaining Deviance

As discussed, deviant labeling subsequently encourages deviant behavior in a person. For instance, a person labeled as a shoplifter for one-time misbehavior might take on the role of shoplifting in order to conform to the essential stereotypical expectations created by that label. Also, the person may experience negative reactions such as mistrust from others and might experience difficulties in securing legitimate jobs through sincere methods with honest intentions. This devaluation and the lack of a legitimate job may influence the labeled shoplifter to involve themself with deviant groups that support and encourage deviant behavior.

Comparison of the Two Theories

The differential association theory and the labeling theory have similarities and differences in some ways. First, they are similar as they hypothesize that people are constructed socially, and their behavior is influenced through associations with others. Sutherland argued that the criminal and non-criminal associations one has had determine the person’s behavior; at the same time, Herbert proposed that by interacting with others, one learns who they are and does what they do on the basis of the attitudes of others towards oneself.

The other similarity is that they have a similar defect in that they do not account for the fact that people can be independent in their thinking and individually motivated, as in the case where one invents a crime. Differential association fails to account for this in the case where an individual invents a crime and has not had associations where the motive and techniques were learned. Similarly, labeling theories fundamentally state that criminal behavior stems from deviant labeling and fails to account for cases where a non-labeled individual independently invents and commits a crime.

Additionally, both theories involve learning of deviant behavior. The differential association explains that the person learns how to commit a crime and the motive, rationalizations, and techniques for committing a crime. Labeling theory also involves learning criminal behavior in the scenario where one is socially excluded and associates with deviant groups, which encourages deviance by providing rationalizations and opportunities for committing a crime.

A major difference between the two theories is that differential association argues that one becomes a criminal when the criminal associations outweigh the non-criminal associations. Its main focus is on the learning of criminal behavior from others through criminal associations. On the other hand, labeling theory mainly focuses on self-concept ste, stereotypes, and expectations attached to the deviant label. Therefore, differential association mainly states that deviance results from excess favorable criminal associations, while according to labeling theory, deviant behavior is mainly a result of the labeling process.

Examples and Application of the Two Theories in a Similar Deviant Behavior

An example of deviance is shoplifting, which entails theft of goods in a retail shop, where a person leaves the store without paying for the picked items. To illustrate, a person may notice an inattentive security guard at a grocery store and consider this as an opportunity to shoplift some items instead of warning the store owner about the careless security guard. In such a scenario, Sutherland explained that through differential association theory, the shoplifter had experienced similar situations through criminal interactions and even learned techniques such as picking items while avoiding being caught by the surveillance cameras and getting away with the crime.

On the other hand, labeling theory hypothesizes that stigma and problems attached to deviant labels trigger deviant behavior, in this case, shoplifting. In accordance with this theory, the labels are sticky, and the initial judgment continues to be in effect. Therefore, the person tends to continue with the shoplifting behavior in order to conform to the judgment of others. The person may also be forced to become a shoplifter due to problems of unemployment, which stem from discrimination and mistrust attached to the deviant label.

Social Work Interventions

Social work interventions are the works that involve the utilization of human behavior theories and social systems carried out by social practitioners to promote the well-being of people in society. This is achieved by providing solutions for problems in human relationships, advocating for just social policies, and empowering people (Hare, 2004). These social interventions aim to help the victims of deviance in need and include the generalist practice and crisis intervention that could help the deviant shoplifter.

The generalist practitioners maximize the functioning of the human system by closely working with all the human systems, such as the society, community, formal organizations, family, friends, and the individual. This implies that as a generalist practitioner, I would get to understand the problems being faced by the individual, such as the barriers and conditions set by society. This, in turn, provides an appropriate manner in which to respond to the needs of the victim. At the same time, working with other human systems such as the community, neighbors, formal organizations, and society enables the changing of conditions that create problems for the individual (Bulut, 2003).

Another applicable social intervention work is crisis intervention. This entails providing support and guidance to the victim who is acutely distressed in terms of mental health due to trauma and lasting cases of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This kind of intervention provides help to the victim by listening and empathizing with them and assessing the situation in order to resolve the socio-psychological problems. The social worker does this carefully to avoid any circumstances that would worsen the social crisis experienced by the victim (Casella, 2020).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the differential association theory and the labeling theory are among the major theories that explain deviant behavior. Differential association essentially focuses on the associations one has had with others and the influence of these associations on the individual’s behavior. On the other hand, labeling mainly states that the criminogenic processes of deviant labeling trigger deviant behavior. However, social work interventions such as generalist practice and crisis interventions provide the knowledge and the platform to solve deviance and problems facing human systems.

References

Bulut, I. (2003). A Generalist Approach in Social Work Education in Turkey. Social Work and Society International Online Journal, 1(1).

Cassella, K. (2020). Social Work and Deviant Behavior. Eastern Gateway Community College.

Goode, E. (2016). Deviant behavior. 11th ed. Routledge.

Goode, E. (2015). The handbook on deviance. 1st ed. Wiley-Blackwell.

Hare, I. (2004). Defining Social Work for the 21st Century. International Social Work, 47(3), pp.407-424.

Krohn, M., Hendrix, N., Lizotte, A. and Hall, G. (2019). Handbook on Crime and Deviance. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing.

TRS Psychology. (n.d). Differential Association Theory.

<https://youtu.be/LP4Ay2bl6Uc>

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Choose two major theories of deviance.
They can be theories we covered within this course, or you may choose a theory that was not presented (there are many).
Complete a research paper covering both theories –
* present the histories,
*main ideas,
*examples of how they explain deviant behaviors, etc.
*Compare and contrast the two theories.
*Create your example of deviance and apply both theories to your example.
*Using your example, identify which social work interventions you could use to help the person in need.

APA format is required. Please use headings throughout the paper so that each required section is easily identified.

Please Note: This research paper requires an abstract page. Thank