Chinese, Mandarin

Spanish

English

Hindi

Arabic

Portuguese

Bengali

Russian

Japanese

Punjabi

German

Javanese

Malay

Telugu

Vietnamese

Korean

French

Marathi

Tamil

Urdu

Turkish

Italian

Chinese, Yue / Cantonese

Thai

Gujarati

Chinese, Jin

Chinese, Min Nan

Persian, Dari

Persian, Western

Polish

Pashto

Kannada

Chinese, Xiang

Malayalam

Sundanese

Hausa

Odia

Burmese

Chinese, Hakka

Ukrainian

Bihari, Bhojpuri

Tagalog

Yoruba

Bihari, Maithili

Uzbek

Sindhi

Amharic

Fula

Romanian

Oromo

Igbo

Azerbaijani

Chinese, Gan

Dutch

Kurdish, Central

Kurdish, Northern

Kurdish, Southern

Malagasy

Lahnda, Saraiki

Nepali

Sinhalese

Chittagonian

Zhuang

Khmer

Turkmen

Assamese

Madurese

Somali

Marwari

Bihari, Magahi

Haryanvi

Hungarian

Chhattisgarhi

Greek, Modern

Chewa

Dakhini

Akan, Twi

Akan, Fante

Kazakh

Chinese, Min Bei

Sylheti

Zulu

Czech

Kinyarwanda

Marwari, Dhundhari

Haitian Creole

Chinese, Min Dong

Ilocano

Quechua

Kirundi

Swedish

Hmong

Shona

Uyghur

Hiligaynon

Mossi

Xhosa

Belarusian

Balochi

Sociology

<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Symbolic interactionism is a theoretical approach that can be used to explain how societies and/or social groups come to view behaviors as deviant or conventional.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxH3>Labeling Theory</OpenstaxH3>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Although all of us violate norms from time to time, few people would consider themselves deviant. Those who do, however, have often been labeled “deviant” by society and have gradually come to believe it themselves. <OpenstaxTerm>Labeling theory</OpenstaxTerm> examines the ascribing of a deviant behavior to another person by members of society. Thus, what is considered deviant is determined not so much by the behaviors themselves or the people who commit them, but by the reactions of others to these behaviors. As a result, what is considered deviant changes over time and can vary significantly across cultures.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Sociologist Edwin Lemert expanded on the concepts of labeling theory and identified two types of deviance that affect identity formation. <OpenstaxTerm>Primary deviance</OpenstaxTerm> is a violation of norms that does not result in any long-term effects on the individual’s self-image or interactions with others. Speeding is a deviant act, but receiving a speeding ticket generally does not make others view you as a bad person, nor does it alter your own self-concept. Individuals who engage in primary deviance still maintain a feeling of belonging in society and are likely to continue to conform to norms in the future.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Sometimes, in more extreme cases, primary deviance can morph into secondary deviance. <OpenstaxTerm>Secondary deviance</OpenstaxTerm> occurs when a person’s self-concept and behavior begin to change after his or her actions are labeled as deviant by members of society. The person may begin to take on and fulfill the role of a “deviant” as an act of rebellion against the society that has labeled that individual as such. For example, consider a high school student who often cuts class and gets into fights. The student is reprimanded frequently by teachers and school staff, and soon enough, develops a reputation as a “troublemaker.” As a result, the student starts acting out even more and breaking more rules; the student has adopted the “troublemaker” label and embraced this deviant identity. Secondary deviance can be so strong that it bestows a <OpenstaxTerm>master status</OpenstaxTerm> on an individual. A master status is a label that describes the chief characteristic of an individual. Some people see themselves primarily as doctors, artists, or grandfathers. Others see themselves as beggars, convicts, or addicts.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxH3>Techniques of Neutralization</OpenstaxH3>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	How do people deal with the labels they are given? This was the subject of a study done by Sykes and Matza (1957). They studied teenage boys who had been labeled as juvenile delinquents to see how they either embraced or denied these labels. Have you ever used any of these techniques?
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Let’s take a scenario and apply all five techniques to explain how they are used. A young person is working for a retail store as a cashier. Their cash drawer has been coming up short for a few days. When the boss confronts the employee, they are labeled as a thief for the suspicion of stealing. How does the employee deal with this label?
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	The Denial of Responsibility: When someone doesn’t take responsibility for their actions or blames others. They may use this technique and say that it was their boss’s fault because they don’t get paid enough to make rent or because they’re getting a divorce. They are rejecting the label by denying responsibility for the action.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	The Denial of Injury: Sometimes people will look at a situation in terms of what effect it has on others. If the employee uses this technique they may say, “What’s the big deal? Nobody got hurt. Your insurance will take care of it.” The person doesn’t see their actions as a big deal because nobody “got hurt.”
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	The Denial of the Victim: If there is no victim there’s no crime. In this technique the person sees their actions as justified or that the victim deserved it. Our employee may look at their situation and say, “I’ve worked here for years without a raise. I was owed that money and if you won’t give it to me I’ll get it my own way.”
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	The Condemnation of the Condemners: The employee might “turn it around on” the boss by blaming them. They may say something like, “You don’t know my life, you have no reason to judge me.” This is taking the focus off of their actions and putting the onus on the accuser to, essentially, prove the person is living up to the label, which also shifts the narrative away from the deviant behavior.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Appeal to a Higher Authority: The final technique that may be used is to claim that the actions were for a higher purpose. The employee may tell the boss that they stole the money because their mom is sick and needs medicine or something like that. They are justifying their actions by making it seem as though the purpose for the behavior is a greater “good” than the action is “bad.” (Sykes &amp; Matza, 1957)
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxNote>
	<OpenstaxNoteTitle> Social Policy and Debate </OpenstaxNoteTitle> <OpenstaxH3> The Right to Vote </OpenstaxH3>
	<OpenstaxParagraph>
		Before she lost her job as an administrative assistant, Leola Strickland postdated and mailed a handful of checks for amounts ranging from $90 to $500. By the time she was able to find a new job, the checks had bounced, and she was convicted of fraud under Mississippi law. Strickland pleaded guilty to a felony charge and repaid her debts; in return, she was spared from serving prison time. 
	</OpenstaxParagraph>
	<OpenstaxParagraph>
		Strickland appeared in court in 2001. More than ten years later, she is still feeling the sting of her sentencing. Why? Because Mississippi is one of twelve states in the United States that bans convicted felons from voting (ProCon 2011).
	</OpenstaxParagraph>
	<OpenstaxParagraph>
		To Strickland, who said she had always voted, the news came as a great shock. She isn’t alone. Some 5.3 million people in the United States are currently barred from voting because of felony convictions (ProCon 2009). These individuals include inmates, parolees, probationers, and even people who have never been jailed, such as Leola Strickland.
	</OpenstaxParagraph>
	<OpenstaxParagraph>
		Under the Fourteenth Amendment, states are allowed to deny voting privileges to individuals who have participated in “rebellion or other crime” (Krajick 2004). Although there are no federally mandated laws on the matter, most states practice at least one form of <OpenstaxEm>felony disenfranchisement</OpenstaxEm>.
	</OpenstaxParagraph>
	<OpenstaxParagraph>
		Is it fair to prevent citizens from participating in such an important process? Proponents of disfranchisement laws argue that felons have a debt to pay to society. Being stripped of their right to vote is part of the punishment for criminal deeds. Such proponents point out that voting isn’t the only instance in which ex-felons are denied rights; state laws also ban released criminals from holding public office, obtaining professional licenses, and sometimes even inheriting property (Lott and Jones 2008). 
	</OpenstaxParagraph>
	<OpenstaxParagraph>
		Opponents of felony disfranchisement in the United States argue that voting is a basic human right and should be available to all citizens regardless of past deeds. Many point out that felony disfranchisement has its roots in the 1800s, when it was used primarily to block Black citizens from voting. These laws disproportionately target poor minority members, denying them a chance to participate in a system that, as a social conflict theorist would point out, is already constructed to their disadvantage (Holding 2006). Those who cite labeling theory worry that denying deviants the right to vote will only further encourage deviant behavior. If ex-criminals are disenfranchised from voting, are they being disenfranchised from society? 
	</OpenstaxParagraph>
</OpenstaxNote>
<OpenstaxFigure id="import-auto-id1169033069930" src="https://openstax.org/apps/archive/20240226.174525/resources/d344aad8e3de8476cd431b71647b21a7a6d889ee" alt="A woman is shown voting at a voting booth." mediaType="image/png" width="600" height="900" />
<OpenstaxFigureText width="600">
	Figure 7.7 Should a former felony conviction permanently strip a U.S. citizen of the right to vote? (Credit: Joshin Yamada/flickr)
</OpenstaxFigureText>
<OpenstaxH3>Edwin Sutherland: Differential Association</OpenstaxH3>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	In the early 1900s, sociologist Edwin Sutherland sought to understand how deviant behavior developed among people. Since criminology was a young field, he drew on other aspects of sociology including social interactions and group learning (Laub 2006). His conclusions established <OpenstaxTerm>differential association theory</OpenstaxTerm>, which suggested that individuals learn deviant behavior from those close to them who provide models of and opportunities for deviance. According to Sutherland, deviance is less a personal choice and more a result of differential socialization processes. For example, a young person whose friends are sexually active is more likely to view sexual activity as acceptable. Sutherland developed a series of propositions to explain how deviance is learned. In proposition five, for example, he discussed how people begin to accept and participate in a behavior after learning whether it is viewed as “favorable” by those around them. In proposition six, Sutherland expressed the ways that exposure to more “definitions” favoring the deviant behavior than those opposing it may eventually lead a person to partake in deviance (Sutherland 1960), applying almost a quantitative element to the learning of certain behaviors. In the example above, a young person may find sexual activity more acceptable once a certain number of their friends become sexually active, not after only one does so.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Sutherland’s theory may explain why crime is multigenerational. A longitudinal study beginning in the 1960s found that the best predictor of antisocial and criminal behavior in children was whether their parents had been convicted of a crime (Todd and Jury 1996). Children who were younger than ten years old when their parents were convicted were more likely than other children to engage in spousal abuse and criminal behavior by their early thirties. Even when taking socioeconomic factors such as dangerous neighborhoods, poor school systems, and overcrowded housing into consideration, researchers found that parents were the main influence on the behavior of their offspring (Todd and Jury 1996). 
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxH3>Travis Hirschi: Control Theory</OpenstaxH3>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Continuing with an examination of large social factors, control theory states that social control is directly affected by the strength of social bonds and that deviance results from a feeling of disconnection from society. Individuals who believe they are a part of society are less likely to commit crimes against it.
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxParagraph>
	Travis Hirschi (1969) identified four types of social bonds that connect people to society: 
</OpenstaxParagraph>
<OpenstaxOl>
	<OpenstaxLi>
		<OpenstaxEm>Attachment</OpenstaxEm> measures our connections to others. When we are closely attached to people, we worry about their opinions of us. People conform to society’s norms in order to gain approval (and prevent disapproval) from family, friends, and romantic partners.
	</OpenstaxLi>
	<OpenstaxLi>
		<OpenstaxEm>Commitment</OpenstaxEm> refers to the investments we make in the community. A well-respected local businessperson who volunteers at their synagogue and is a member of the neighborhood block organization has more to lose from committing a crime than a person who doesn’t have a career or ties to the community.
	</OpenstaxLi>
	<OpenstaxLi>
		Similarly, levels of <OpenstaxEm>involvement</OpenstaxEm>, or participation in socially legitimate activities, lessen a person’s likelihood of deviance. A child who plays little league baseball and takes art classes has fewer opportunities to ______.
	</OpenstaxLi>
	<OpenstaxLi>
		The final bond, <OpenstaxEm>belief</OpenstaxEm>, is an agreement on common values in society. If a person views social values as beliefs, they will conform to them. An environmentalist is more likely to pick up trash in a park, because a clean environment is a social value to them (Hirschi 1969).
	</OpenstaxLi>
</OpenstaxOl>
<OpenstaxTable id="eip-734">
	<OpenstaxTbody>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Functionalism
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Associated Theorist
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Deviance arises from:
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Strain Theory
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Robert Merton
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				A lack of ways to reach socially accepted goals by accepted methods
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Social Disorganization Theory
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				University of Chicago researchers
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Weak social ties and a lack of social control; society has lost the ability to enforce norms with some groups
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Conflict Theory
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Associated Theorist
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Deviance arises from:
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Unequal System
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Karl Marx
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Inequalities in wealth and power that arise from the economic system
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Power Elite
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				C. Wright Mills
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Ability of those in power to define deviance in ways that maintain the status quo
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Symbolic Interactionism
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Associated Theorist
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Deviance arises from:
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Labeling Theory
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Edwin Lemert
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				The reactions of others, particularly those in power who are able to determine labels
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Differential Association Theory
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Edwin Sutherland
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Learning and modeling deviant behavior seen in other people close to the individual
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
		<OpenstaxTr>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Control Theory
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Travis Hirschi
			</OpenstaxTd>
			<OpenstaxTd>
				Feelings of disconnection from society
			</OpenstaxTd>
		</OpenstaxTr>
	</OpenstaxTbody>
</OpenstaxTable>
<OpenstaxTableTitle>
	Table 7.2 
</OpenstaxTableTitle>

7.2.3 Symbolic Interactionism

1 An Introduction to Sociology

1.1 What Is Sociology?

1.1.1 What Are Society and Culture?

1.1.2 Studying Patterns: How Sociologists View Society

1.1.3 Studying Part and Whole: How Sociologists View Social Structures

1.2 The History of Sociology

1.2.1 Creating a Discipline: European Theorists

1.2.2 Applying the Discipline: American Theorists and Practitioners

1.3 Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology

1.3.1 Functionalism

1.3.2 Conflict Theory

1.3.3 Symbolic Interactionist Theory

1.3.4 Sociological Theory Today

1.4 Why Study Sociology?

1.4.1 Sociology and a Better Society

1.4.2 Sociology in the Workplace

2 Sociological Research

2.1 Approaches to Sociological Research

2.1.1 The Scientific Method

2.1.2 Interpretive Framework

2.1.3 Critical Sociology

2.2 Research Methods

2.2.1 Surveys

2.2.2 Field Research

2.2.3 Experiments

2.2.4 Secondary Data Analysis

2.3 Ethical Concerns

3 Culture

3.1 What Is Culture?

3.1.1 Cultural Universals

3.1.2 Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism

3.2 Elements of Culture

3.2.1 Values and Beliefs

3.2.2 Norms

3.2.3 Symbols and Culture

3.2.4 Language and Symbols

3.2.5 Language and Culture

3.3 High, Low, Pop, Sub, Counter-culture and Cultural Change

3.3.1 High, Low, and Popular Culture

3.3.2 Subculture and Counterculture

3.3.3 Cultural Change

3.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Culture

4 Society and Social Interaction

4.1 Types of Societies

4.1.1 Preindustrial Societies

4.1.2 Industrial Society

4.1.3 Postindustrial Society

4.2 Theoretical Perspectives on Society

4.2.1 Émile Durkheim and Functionalism

4.2.2 Karl Marx and Conflict Theory

4.2.3 Max Weber and Symbolic Interactionism

4.3 Social Constructions of Reality

4.3.1 Roles and Status

4.3.2 Presentation of Self

5 Socialization

5.1 Theories of Self-Development

5.1.1 Psychological Perspectives on Self-Development

5.1.2 Sociological Theories of Self-Development

5.2 Why Socialization Matters

5.2.1 Nature versus Nurture

5.3 Agents of Socialization

5.3.1 Social Group Agents

5.3.2 Institutional Agents

5.4 Socialization Across the Life Course

5.4.1 Resocialization

6 Groups and Organization

6.1 Types of Groups

6.1.1 Defining a Group

6.1.2 Types of Groups

6.1.3 In-Groups and Out-Groups

6.1.4 Reference Groups

6.2 Group Size and Structure

6.2.1 Dyads, Triads, and Large Groups

6.2.2 Group Leadership

6.2.3 Conformity

6.2.4 The Bystander Effect and Diffusion of Responsibility

6.3 Formal Organizations

6.3.1 Types of Formal Organizations

6.3.2 The McDonaldization of Society

7 Deviance, Crime, and Social Control

7.1 Deviance and Control

7.1.1 Deviance, Crime, and Society

7.1.2 Social Control

7.2 Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance and Crime

7.2.1 Functionalism

7.2.2 Conflict Theory

7.3 Crime and the Law

7.3.1 Types of Crimes

7.3.2 Crime Statistics

7.3.3 Public Perception of Crime

7.3.4 The U.S. Criminal Justice System

8 Media and Technology

8.1 Technology Today

8.1.1 What Is Technology?

8.2 Media and Technology in Society

8.2.1 Categorizing Technology

8.2.2 Types of Media and Technology

8.2.3 Product Advertising and the Attention Economy

8.2.4 Homogenization and Fragmentation

Question	Answer
a theory that states individuals learn deviant behavior from those close to them who provide models of and opportunities for deviance	differential association theory
the ascribing of a deviant behavior to another person by members of society	labeling theory
a label that describes the chief characteristic of an individual	master status
a violation of norms that does not result in any long-term effects on the individual’s self-image or interactions with others	primary deviance
deviance that occurs when a person’s self-concept and behavior begin to change after his or her actions are labeled as deviant by members of society	secondary deviance