| Papers [1-16] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "LABELING CRIMINOLOGY": |
|
|
Labeling and Criminology, 2004.
An analysis of the implications of labeling theory for the discipline of criminology and for policy-making purposes.
4,382 words (approx. 17.5 pages), 23 sources, MLA, AU$ 166.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a critical analysis of the implications of labeling theory, both for the discipline of criminology and for policymakers today and in the future. The paper contends that the fundamental assumption of labeling theory is that perceived negative societal reactions will inevitably lead to the development of negative self-conceptions and greater criminal involvement. A summary of the research is provided in the conclusion.
Outline
Introduction
Review and Discussion
Background and Overview
Labeling Theory
Implications for Criminologists
Implications for Policymakers
Conclusion
From the Paper
"An increasingly common phrase being heard in America today is "Don't label me!" This reaction may be largely in response to the persistent and lingering aspects of a dangerous practice that has been proven time and again to be largely ineffective for criminal justice and policy-making purposes, but which does not seem to be going anywhere soon. According to Freilich, Raybeck and Savishinsky (1991), George Herbert Mead and his colleagues at the Chicago School were among the first sociologists to emphasize both social process and the role of individual perception in the construction of social life. "Their influence is reflected in a recent, major treatment of deviance, namely, labeling theory, which is largely the work of Howard Becker (1963), Albert Cohen, (1962), Edwin Lemert (1967) and others. In sum, labeling theory maintains that deviance is a social construct. Freilich et al. note, "The members of society decide what they mean by the term and then label individuals whose behavior is perceived as departing from accepted norms. The labelees, in turn, find themselves marginalized, prevented from engaging in certain forms of social participation, and encouraged to conceive of themselves as deviant" (20)."
|
| Essay # 103486 |
temporarily unavailable
|
|
|
|
Labeling Theory, 2007.
This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of the labeling theory, as it relates to criminology.
1,485 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 6 sources, MLA, AU$ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article the writer notes that in the study of criminology, there are numerous theories that help explain, or attempt to explain, the cause of delinquency and criminal activity. The writer points out that while some focus on the role of society, the legal system, or parental control, others focus more on the individual, and the process by which individuals learn. The writer discusses that labeling theory, in contrast, is a combination of both theoretical concepts, in that the labeling theory attempts to explain how the learning process of individuals is influenced by the actions of society and the legal system. This paper focuses on the labeling theory and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of this theory in real world applications of criminology.
From the Paper
"Lemert's theory differentiates between primary and secondary deviance. Primary deviance is thought to be minor rule violations that are spontaneous and sporadic. Secondary deviance, on the other hand, is the behavior that results after social control agents react to the primary deviance. According to labeling theory, this secondary deviance is a direct result of the labels given to the rule breaker following the initial transgression. Because of labels attached to the individual and of the social reaction to the primary deviance, the individual is stigmatized, thereby creating a social identity stemming from deviance. Repeated negative definitions of the individual's identity result in negative self-labeling, and the individual begins to see themselves as a deviant. More recent additions to the labeling theory stress this factor in the formation of the criminal subculture, in that members labeled as deviant begin to join with other, similarly labeled individuals."
| |
|
Labeling Children, 2004.
A literature review of the effects of labeling on the academic performance and experience of disabled youth.
1,317 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 5 sources, MLA, AU$ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines current research regarding labels in schools and discusses the effects of those labels on the academic performance of students. The paper debates the high incidence of uses of disability labels, such as learning disability, behavioral disorders, or attention deficit disorder. The paper presents critics of labeling who argue that the labels themselves have a negative impact on the academic performance of children with those labels. The paper also explores the views of proponents of labeling, noting that the labels are necessary to provide all children with the educational assistance they need.
From the Paper
"Those narrow groups do not identify specific abilities or disabilities, according to the researchers, but instead suggest specific treatment and intervention that is broad in topic. The result, they note, is often groups of children falling through the cracks in education, due to a failure to identify and assist in the areas the student truly needs. They continue to propose that, instead of broad labels, students? educations are tailored to fit their specific needs. In this way, the disabling effect of labels can be minimized, and students can do better, even when labeled (Levine & Swartz, 1995). Brody and Mills (1997) also found that expectations of teachers and peers in regards to disabled students played an important role in the development of those student?s abilities. Their study focused on those disabled students who are also gifted. The researchers noted that many children with special needs are rarely identified and are often not given the tools they need, either in their low-ability areas or in their high ability areas (Brody & Mills, 1997)."
| |
|
Labeling Deviant, 2006.
A discussion regarding labeling with specific focus on the label of deviant.
2,950 words (approx. 11.8 pages), 8 sources, MLA, AU$ 126.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how the labeling perspective stresses the ways that people are labeled and stigmatized, as well as the consequences this stigmatization has on people's identity and life experiences. This paper addresses how the labeling perspective applies to individuals labeled as hyperactive or those with ADHD/ADD.
From the Paper
"The earliest labeling theorists including Tannenbaum (1938) correctly assumed that in the process of labeling one, segregation occurs and individuals are outcast or singled out. Often as a result of this process people start engaging in the very negative behaviors people associate with the label they are provided. Lemert (1951) is among the first supporting a social reaction approach suggesting a difference exists between primary and secondary deviance. Lemert (1951) suggests that primary deviance occurs when someone doesn't view their behavior as deviant whereas secondary deviance involves an individual's acknowledgment of their status as a deviant. Primary deviance may arise from various causes, whereas secondary deviance typically arises as someone attempt to defend themselves from the attack or onslaught of others; it may further serve as a means through which someone protects or adapts to others reactions to their primary deviance or perceived negative behavior. "
| |
|
Criminology Theories, 2007.
This paper discusses criminology theories and looks at how they help prevent crime and reduce criminal behaviors.
1,122 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 4 sources, MLA, AU$ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines two criminology theories and holds them against the current social phenomena of adolescent substance abuse. The writer explores the relevant theories. The writer notes that as mankind continues to study the criminal element, it continues to develop theories that can be applied to criminal behavior. The writer then explains that two well known criminal theories are labeling and social bonding. In each of these theories there are markers to help explain some of the behavior patterns when it comes to adolescents and substance abuse. The writer points out that it is important to understand how these theories impact the problem, so that future attempts can be made to proactively prevent substance abuse.
Outline:
Introduction
Labeling Theory
Social Bond Theory
Relating Theory to Social Issue
Influence
From the Paper
"In a recent study regarding the labeling theory, adolescent participants were asked if they had received labels from professionals and asked if their families and friends had labeled them, and if so what the labels were. The adolescent's encounters with juvenile courts, social workers and substance abuse programs were also recorded to determine if the label theory supported the participants' background and labeling.
The study concluded that being labeled with a negative label, can create negative behaviors in adolescence.
In addition, the participants did record a higher level of drug use if they had received negative labeling from professionals and personal interactions."
|
| Essay # 65066 |
temporarily unavailable
|
|
|
|
Classical and Positivist Criminology, 2007.
A comparison of the classical thinking and the positivist perspective of criminology.
955 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses two of the most prominent schools of criminology: classical thinking and the positivist perspective. The paper compares the different precepts upon which each school of thought operates and analyzes each of the theories and their key assumptions. The paper then discusses their attribution of causal factors and each of their approaches to addressing crime.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Classical Criminology
Positivist Criminology
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The school of classical criminology differs significantly from the thinking demonstrated under the positivist approach to crime. Classical criminology has its origins in the concepts of free will, individual decision-making and the benefits of society to the individual. The school addresses the problem of crime using punishment and deterrent actions. On the other hand, positivism rejects the concept of the individual and free will and instead embraces the idea of enduring evolutionary traits that define a basic criminal personality, and which can be assessed using scientific methods. The two perspectives, though very different (and even contradictory) in nature, both provide the basis for a cohesive overall approach to addressing the problem of crime as a wide variety of approaches are incorporated."
| |
|
Positivism and Modern Criminology, 2004.
An examination of the rise of a positivist methodology in criminology and the influence it has had.
1,963 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 8 sources, APA, AU$ 90.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses how the contribution of a positivist methodology to criminology cannot be underestimated and how the very name criminology did not become common until the 1890?s and the rise of positivism. It looks at how the work of Cesare Lombroso established a new method of conducting criminal inquiry even though the work of Guerry and Quetelet on French crime statistics and social data had already introduced a positivistic approach into the study of crime especially with regard to the social links with criminal behaviour. It also explores how the work of the Italian School of Criminology (scula positiva) with people like Enrico Ferri used the methodology that Cesare Lombroso introduced but applied them to different areas of inquiry. It shows how this multi-factor scientific approach allowed the science of crime to develop and become an internationally recognised academic field and encouraged people all over the world to try and search for causal links between crime and various factors like poverty and education levels.
From the Paper
"The work of Lombroso was new and radical but what is more important to the development of positivism and its subsequent influence on modern criminology were the methods that he employed in his study. The scientific methods he used revolutionised the study of crime, his new model of approach sought to identify, categorise and measure differences between criminals. Lombroso published his findings in 1876 in L?Umo Delinquente (The Delinquent Mind) and his work and methods gave rise to a new international movement. The Italian School of Criminology (scula positiva) emerged and took the methodology of Lombroso and expanded upon them. The work of people such as Enrico Ferri according to David Garland, ?showed a considerable diversity and eclecticism.? The ?French School? focused mainly upon the sociological and environmental determinants of crime and the ?German School? included the study criminalistics and the development of new forensic techniques."
| |
|
Theories of Criminology, 2008.
This paper discusses and explains different theories of criminology.
1,134 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 12 sources, APA, AU$ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses that in the field of criminology, various theories have been advanced to explain why people commit crimes. The writer notes that more manageable and more conventional is the listing of theories provided by Victor Jupp, which posits four theories: biological, social bonding, social structure and psychological bonding. Jupp points out that these four theories reflect the learning of different intellectual disciplines and come to widely different opinions about the individual criminal, but are all directed to the common question - why do people commit crimes? The writer concludes that while each of these theories offers some insight, there is a frustrating difficultly in criminology. The writer maintains that although criminology may be able to explain why certain people have committed certain crimes, it is frustratingly less effective at discerning how one might commit crimes and how to prevent them.
From the Paper
"The biological theory and the social bonding theory both assume that the individual develops into a criminal because of inborn factors. Lombroso and his followers contend that the stigmata mark the atavistic criminal, and these cannot be changed. Eysenck and company contend that, certainly in the adult, the personality is largely unchangeable, and in the case of the criminal, the psychoticisms cannot be removed. By contrast, social structure theories contend that the individual is more of a blank slate, shaped by his surroundings, so that if these surroundings can be manipulated, criminality will not develop."
| |
|
Classical Criminology, 2004.
An overview of several theories regarding classical criminology.
1,558 words (approx. 6.2 pages), 4 sources, MLA, AU$ 74.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the backdrop for the creation of the classical school of criminology was the movement in Europe traditionally referred to as the Enlightenment. It looks at how, generally, the Italian thinker, Cesare Beccaria, is credited with the creation of classical criminology and how, in creating his ideas, he did not so much generate original concepts as link together and systematize the ideas that were already circulating in the Enlightenment into a cohesive theory of criminology. It also shows how his influences were thinkers such as Locke, Bacon, Rousseau, and Diderot. It looks at how several different schools based on classicism have developed, including the classicist and positivist schools of thought.
From the Paper
"Several different schools based on classicism have developed, including classicism, which reconsiders the limitations of an agent?s free will in cases such as self-defense or mistaken identity; largely it was an attempt to find a compromise of sorts between the classical and positivist perspective. Similarly, the Rational Choice perspective focuses on the decisions made by the criminal in an attempt to understand the ?goal? of any crime. Routine Activities Theory focuses on a situational analysis of crimes, considering when and where crimes most typically occur and how we can use those facts to prevent them. All of these schools are primarily informed by the classical beliefs that crimes are committed for rational reasons related to hedonistic principles."
| |
|
Food Labeling, 2005.
An examination of the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Part 201, on food labeling.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, AU$ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the historical events leading to the code of federal regulations on food labeling in the United States. The paper focuses on specific acts in history which address labeling as a way to protect health and safety. The paper further discusses changes in legislation that have led to the current laws. The paper examines the most significant issues related to labeling that are currently being considered, and draws conclusions based upon the research.
From the Paper
"The history of Federal regulations that concerned labeling in the United States began with the import and export of foods, and the concern of the American public that disease could easily be spread through foodstuffs that were not regulated, nor guaranteed safe. Through interpretation of early United States doctrines, (more specifically through the commerce clause in the Constitution) Congress has traditionally allowed states to regulate labeling of foods in order to provide some guarantee of safety to the consumer ("Food Labeling", 1992). Yet, by the 1800s Congress determined that the Federal government would control the labeling aspects of imported and exported products, and that states would be responsible for governing the labeling for products in-state, or to other states ("Food Labeling", 1992)."
| |
|
Labeling Theory, 2002.
This paper looks at the Nushawn Case and the Labeling Theory.
1,530 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, AU$ 73.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at how the Nushawn Williams case presented society with a new way to look at social deviance and behavioral, placing a particular emphasis on the labeling theory. The author illustrates how the Williams case in many ways supports the labeling theory, which has received its share of criticism over the last 20 years. This paper examines the labeling theory and also points to specific instances in the Williams case which support the theory.
From the Paper
"The labeling theory makes an attempt to explain deviant behavior by how the behavior is perceived by others and how once the deviant is perceived by others and treated as such, or labeled, they continue to behave in the way that is expected of them. Labeling often segregates the deviant from society, widens the gap between the deviant and any hope of living a normal life, and perpetuates an endless cycle of deviant behavior.
The story of Nushawn Williams, a 21-year-old who may have exposed more than 100 people to HIV, is a prime example of the labeling theory in action. In an in-depth article, Brent Gregax overviews the life of this young man leading up to his incarceration. One could argue that Williams was a victim of the labeling theory since the day he was born. According to Gegax, ?Williams? grandmother smokes crack. He has no idea who his father is. His mother has prostituted herself and even made his little sister turn tricks in front of their apartment in order to support her drug habit (Gegax,1)."
| |
|
Labeling Theory, 2003.
Presents an overview of the labeling theory.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 5 sources, AU$ 138.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines effects of labeling on secondary deviance. It examines specific linkages between labeling and rule-making as a means of defining behavior and the creation of secondary deviance. It also looks at the difference between primary and secondary deviance.
From the Paper
"Labeling and Secondary Deviance
Introduction
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 ..."
| |
|
Bentham, Utilitarianism, and the Classical Theory of Criminology, 2004.
An examination of the contributions made by Jeremy Bentham towards criminology theories.
1,987 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, AU$ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the criminology theories of Jeremy Bentham. It begins by providing a biographical background of Bentham and explains how his love for law and criminology pushed him to develop new theories. It discusses why these theories were controversial at the time and looks at some critiques of the theories.
From the Paper
"Bentham?s contribution to the classical theory came in the form of an idea he advanced called utilitarianism (Siegel, 2000). The theory of utilitarianism is based around the idea that lawmaking should be done with the goal of providing the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people (Siegel, 2000). Bentham believed that empirical calculations could be derived to judge what laws would provide the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. As for the criminal application of this theory, he believed that individuals weigh the probabilities of present and future pleasures against those of present and future pain. This balancing of outcomes served as the deciding factor of whether or not an individual would commit an illegal act. Accordingly, Bentham believed that if the proposed pain was in excess of the pleasure derived from the crime, then no crime would result. This is utilitarianism in its simplest sense. In order to understand in a deeper sense (one that explains contexts, applications, and criticisms) one has to look deeper into Bentham?s ideas on legal duties, obligations, and powers, and how these contributed to utilitarianism, and finally, how utilitarianism contributed to the classical theory as we understand it today."
| |
|
Deviance Theory and Criminology, 2008.
This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of deviance theory and its impact on the field of criminology.
1,392 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 5 sources, APA, AU$ 67.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper relates that although the theory of deviance helps to shed light on some of the reasons people engage in criminal actions, the theory is a social construct and is thus inherently flawed. The paper maintains, that this theory should, therefore, occupy only a minor role in the field of criminology. The paper also asserts that this theory only be employed as a means of interpretation of the criminal mind when there is no possibility that the root cause of deviance may lie within the society and not the individual.
Outline:
Introduction
Strengths
Weaknesses
Deviance and Criminology
From the Paper
"The theory of deviance is not organic. Broadly defined, deviance is behavior that violates the norms of a particular society. Thus, the theory is a creation of society, and a social construct that labels persons within a society as outcasts because they tend to display certain behaviors that society deems reprehensible. Deviance, then, is best understood as an artificial creation, which fits neatly into the realms of academic disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, psychology and social psychology to explain the unexpected actions of individuals. Most of all, the theory helps us to understand the most reprehensible among us: the criminal. "
|
|
|
