Interactionism and Labelling Theory

Interactionism offers a fundamentally different approach to crime and deviance from the structuralist perspectives (functionalism and Marxism). Rather than asking "Why do some people commit crime?", interactionists ask: "Why are some people and some behaviours labelled as criminal or deviant, while others are not?" The focus shifts from the criminal to the agencies of social control — the police, courts, media, and other institutions that define, detect, and punish crime.

Key Definition: Labelling is the process by which certain individuals and behaviours are defined as criminal or deviant by those with the power to do so. A label is not simply a description — it becomes a master status that overrides all other aspects of a person's identity.

---

Howard Becker: Moral Entrepreneurs and the Deviant Career

Howard Becker (1963) is the most influential labelling theorist. His central argument is that deviance is not an inherent quality of an act but is the product of social definition:

"Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders. Deviance is not a quality of the act a person commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an 'offender'." — Becker (1963)

Moral Entrepreneurs

Becker argued that rules are created by moral entrepreneurs — people who lead campaigns to change the law, driven by the belief that their particular moral vision should be imposed on others. The creation of new rules inevitably creates new categories of criminals and deviants.

Example: Becker studied the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act (1937) in the United States. He showed that the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, led by Harry Anslinger, had campaigned to make marijuana illegal by linking its use to Mexican immigrants and African Americans. The new law created a new category of criminal — marijuana users — where none had existed before.

The Deviant Career

Becker argued that being labelled as deviant can set in motion a deviant career. Once a person is publicly labelled, the label becomes a master status — it overrides all other identities (parent, worker, friend) and becomes the primary way in which others see and interact with that person. This can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy: the labelled individual accepts the deviant identity and acts accordingly.

The deviant career may progress through several stages:

1. The individual commits an initial deviant act (which may be minor or accidental).
2. The act is detected and the individual is labelled (e.g., arrested, charged, convicted).
3. The label becomes a master status, leading to social exclusion — the individual may lose their job, friends, and family support.
4. Excluded from conventional society, the individual is pushed toward deviant groups, reinforcing the deviant identity.
5. The individual joins a deviant subculture, which provides support, a sense of belonging, and a justification for continued deviance.

---

Edwin Lemert: Primary and Secondary Deviance

Edwin Lemert (1951) distinguished between two types of deviance:

Type	Description	Example
Primary deviance	Deviant acts that have not been publicly labelled. Most people engage in occasional primary deviance (speeding, underage drinking, petty theft) without being caught or labelled. Primary deviance has little impact on the individual's self-concept or social identity.	A student who shoplifts once but is not caught. They do not think of themselves as a criminal.
Secondary deviance	Deviance that results from the societal reaction to the initial act — from being caught, labelled, and treated as deviant. The label becomes a master status, the individual internalises the deviant identity, and further deviance follows as a consequence of the labelling process itself.	The same student is caught, prosecuted, and labelled a "thief." Excluded from school and stigmatised, they begin to see themselves as criminal and escalate their offending.

Lemert's key insight is that societal reaction (labelling) can cause more deviance than it prevents. The criminal justice system, far from deterring crime, may actually amplify it by pushing labelled individuals into deviant careers.

Key Definition: Secondary deviance is deviance that occurs as a result of the societal reaction to primary deviance. The individual accepts the deviant label and incorporates it into their identity, leading to further deviant behaviour.

---

Aaron Cicourel: Typifications and the Negotiation of Justice

Aaron Cicourel (1968) studied the working practices of juvenile justice officers in California and found that decisions about which young people to arrest, charge, and prosecute were based on typifications — stereotypical assumptions about what a "typical delinquent" looks like.

Officers were more likely to arrest and charge young people who fitted their typification of a delinquent: working-class, from broken homes, living in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, and from ethnic minority backgrounds. Middle-class youth who committed similar offences were more likely to be let off with a warning because they did not fit the typification — officers viewed them as essentially "good kids" from "good families" who had made a mistake.

Cicourel's work demonstrates that official crime statistics do not reflect the real distribution of crime. Instead, they reflect the decisions, assumptions, and biases of the agencies that produce them. Justice is negotiated rather than applied equally.

---

Jock Young: The Hippie Marijuana Users of Notting Hill

Jock Young (1971) studied marijuana use among hippies in Notting Hill, London. He found that marijuana use was initially peripheral to the hippies' lifestyle — it was a minor recreational activity, not central to their identity (primary deviance).