What Are The Implications of Labelling Theory For Defining And Understanding Criminality?
Before the emergence of labelling theory, crime was only seen as an unlawful behaviour and there was a common belief that people choose to commit crime themselves due to a ‘free will' factor. However, with the arrival of the labelling theory, the concepts and opinions changed about how crime and criminality were perceived previously. According to Burke (2009) labelling theories proposes that crime is a product of the social reaction to an activity, if the action is ignored or not discovered the person is processed by the criminal justice system and sets off on the path to a criminal career. In simple words, labelling theory suggest that if the members of the society labelled an individual as a delinquent and continued to treat him like a delinquent, though the intensity of the crime may be minor, then the end result would be that he or she will try to meet their expectations and will become a professional criminal. There are numerous implications of labelling theory when one is trying to define and understand criminality.
First and foremost, labelling theory is often referred to as a ‘societal reaction' theory because of the massive reactions by the society members for the offender. Thus, even, if a person is arrested for stealing a chocolate from a bakery, the members of the society will not only label the offender as a thief but will also repeatedly behave in a suspicious way as if they are dealing with a serial killer. This constant labelling and differentiated behaviour of the society members will cause him or her to behave according to the label despite the fact that he or she is a first time offender. The process of attaching labels to offenders, especially to first time offenders, actually boost their criminal impulses and they try to match the label that has been attached to them by the society. Therefore, criminality is provoked and produced by the societal reaction. This is the major implication of labelling theory for defining criminality as it is not the criminal propensity of people that urged them for involvement in crime instead it is the reactions of the society members which gives a push to their criminal career.  Matsueda (1992), as summarised by Burke (2009), also argues that informal labels affect the subsequent level of crime committed by individuals because these help shape their perceptions of how others see them. Thus, if they believed that others see them as delinquent and troublemakers, they are more likely to act in accord with this perception and engage in offending behaviour. In such situation it is the members of the society and their reaction to the offender which act as a driving force for offenders to engage in delinquent behaviour in future. According to Tannenbaum (1938), as summarised by Williams and McShane (2004) a ‘tag' becomes attached when a child is caught in delinquent activity. The tag identifies the child as a delinquent. This tag may change the child's self-image, and causes people to react to the tag, not the child. Thus, his argument was that the process of tagging criminals actually helps create delinquency and criminality. Labelling creates criminal behaviour. The label may be absorbed by the individuals up to the extent that they perceived themselves to be a criminal even though the intensity of crime committed may be minor and they may be first time offenders as well. The members of the society identify the person with the label attached to them. However, the labels attached to the people are mostly based on false assumptions and rumours. They actually believe that there is no chance of that person becoming a law abiding citizen in future. They rather believe in a philosophy that ‘once a criminal, always a criminal'. According to Becker (1963) as summarised by Richard, Cullen and Robert (1989), the offender becomes, ‘one who is different from the rest of us, who cannot and will not act as a moral human being and therefore might break other important rules''. As a result being a ‘'criminal'' becomes the person's ‘'master status''. The members of the society do not consider his previous social status or past achievements but the first and foremost thing that comes to their minds is that they are dealing with a ‘criminal'.  The people see an individual, once labelled, as being what the label says he or she is. The person who is arrested due to a criminal conviction realises that the world and the reactions of the society member will never be the same for him as it was before his arrest. He loses his self-image because of the reaction of the society members and sets off for a criminal career. This reluctant and discriminated behaviour of the society members have serious negative consequences on his life which drives an individual to a criminal career. Thus offenders are more likely to see their self-image as a criminal and they try to match the perceptions of the common public as a deviant.
Moreover, when a person is arrested or caught in a delinquent act then the social circle of an individual is squeezed. It is the social life of a person which suffers most when a person is labelled as a criminal. People who are labelled as criminals are usually cut off from social relationships. As their reputation as a criminal spreads, phone calls are not answered, invitations to social engagements are not exchanged, friends suddenly find it hard to meet with the excuse of busy schedules and so on. This reluctance from friends and peer groups also let them believe as if they are alien. Out of extreme complex, they move on to the criminal path.
Furthermore, attaching an official criminal label to offenders hinders their employment opportunities. According to Williams and McShane (2004) Individuals who have been labelled as criminals become more prominent in the eyes of the society. Society becomes much more aware of the Individuals who are labelled as criminals and this awareness often causes them to be watched more closely and thus a second and third discovery of deviant behaviour is more likely than the first time. People who are identified as deviants then have fewer chances to do well in the world. This means that legitimate options are not available to succeed and illegal means may become the only option left open. It would not be surprising to discover that many of the areas in United States with black majority have unemployment rates of 40 to 50 per cent. There are few jobs and no one will hire them. Keeping in view that a person had been taken to prison or only arrested, leaves the character of the person doubtful and the employers, therefore, hesitate to hire them. In such circumstances, crime emerges as the only option left. According to Robert, Cullen and Richard (1989) the labelling process is a powerful criminogenic force that stabilizes participation in illegal roles and turns those marginally involved in crime into chronic or career offenders.
This gives rise to a very significant and worth considering point of ‘society creating criminals'. The reactions of the society members make the person feel as if he or she is an alien. Restricting socialisation, limiting employment opportunities, deficit of trust and so on will make an individual think as if he is a professional criminal, though in reality he may be the first time offender, as a result he will try to match the perceptions of others and thus a first time offender develops an intensity to commit crime and becomes a professional criminal. Labelling theorists argue that there is no criminal personality and there is no human being in this world with criminal attributes by birth instead the societal reaction is nevertheless responsible for the offending behaviour of an individual. A very significant phenomenon which is often inter-related with labelling theory is structural factors. Burke in his book (2009) refer to the work of Piliavin and Briar (1964) who looked at police encounters with juveniles and found that arrest decisions were based largely on physical cues- manner, dress and general appearance-from which the officer inferred the character of the youth. Structural factors such as gender, social class, ethnic group and time of day were also significant, thus a young working class, black male in a ‘high delinquency area' at night was seen to have a very high chance of being at least stopped and questioned, if not arrested.
Labelling theory is largely concerned with the criminal rather than crime. The theory mainly focuses on the negative reactions of the society to the deviant which gradually deepens the criminal nature of the offender. Labels can cause future problems therefore they should be avoided.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Hopkins Burke R. (2009). An Introduction to Criminological Theory (Third edition). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
Robert Lilly J, Francis Cullen T & Richard Ball A. (1989). Criminological theory: context and consequences (volume 5). London: SAGE Publications.
Williams III P. & Marylin McShane D. (2004). Criminological Theory (Fourth edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
First and foremost, labelling theory is often referred to as a ‘societal reaction' theory because of the massive reactions by the society members for the offender. Thus, even, if a person is arrested for stealing a chocolate from a bakery, the members of the society will not only label the offender as a thief but will also repeatedly behave in a suspicious way as if they are dealing with a serial killer. This constant labelling and differentiated behaviour of the society members will cause him or her to behave according to the label despite the fact that he or she is a first time offender. The process of attaching labels to offenders, especially to first time offenders, actually boost their criminal impulses and they try to match the label that has been attached to them by the society. Therefore, criminality is provoked and produced by the societal reaction. This is the major implication of labelling theory for defining criminality as it is not the criminal propensity of people that urged them for involvement in crime instead it is the reactions of the society members which gives a push to their criminal career.  Matsueda (1992), as summarised by Burke (2009), also argues that informal labels affect the subsequent level of crime committed by individuals because these help shape their perceptions of how others see them. Thus, if they believed that others see them as delinquent and troublemakers, they are more likely to act in accord with this perception and engage in offending behaviour. In such situation it is the members of the society and their reaction to the offender which act as a driving force for offenders to engage in delinquent behaviour in future. According to Tannenbaum (1938), as summarised by Williams and McShane (2004) a ‘tag' becomes attached when a child is caught in delinquent activity. The tag identifies the child as a delinquent. This tag may change the child's self-image, and causes people to react to the tag, not the child. Thus, his argument was that the process of tagging criminals actually helps create delinquency and criminality. Labelling creates criminal behaviour. The label may be absorbed by the individuals up to the extent that they perceived themselves to be a criminal even though the intensity of crime committed may be minor and they may be first time offenders as well. The members of the society identify the person with the label attached to them. However, the labels attached to the people are mostly based on false assumptions and rumours. They actually believe that there is no chance of that person becoming a law abiding citizen in future. They rather believe in a philosophy that ‘once a criminal, always a criminal'. According to Becker (1963) as summarised by Richard, Cullen and Robert (1989), the offender becomes, ‘one who is different from the rest of us, who cannot and will not act as a moral human being and therefore might break other important rules''. As a result being a ‘'criminal'' becomes the person's ‘'master status''. The members of the society do not consider his previous social status or past achievements but the first and foremost thing that comes to their minds is that they are dealing with a ‘criminal'.  The people see an individual, once labelled, as being what the label says he or she is. The person who is arrested due to a criminal conviction realises that the world and the reactions of the society member will never be the same for him as it was before his arrest. He loses his self-image because of the reaction of the society members and sets off for a criminal career. This reluctant and discriminated behaviour of the society members have serious negative consequences on his life which drives an individual to a criminal career. Thus offenders are more likely to see their self-image as a criminal and they try to match the perceptions of the common public as a deviant.
Moreover, when a person is arrested or caught in a delinquent act then the social circle of an individual is squeezed. It is the social life of a person which suffers most when a person is labelled as a criminal. People who are labelled as criminals are usually cut off from social relationships. As their reputation as a criminal spreads, phone calls are not answered, invitations to social engagements are not exchanged, friends suddenly find it hard to meet with the excuse of busy schedules and so on. This reluctance from friends and peer groups also let them believe as if they are alien. Out of extreme complex, they move on to the criminal path.
Furthermore, attaching an official criminal label to offenders hinders their employment opportunities. According to Williams and McShane (2004) Individuals who have been labelled as criminals become more prominent in the eyes of the society. Society becomes much more aware of the Individuals who are labelled as criminals and this awareness often causes them to be watched more closely and thus a second and third discovery of deviant behaviour is more likely than the first time. People who are identified as deviants then have fewer chances to do well in the world. This means that legitimate options are not available to succeed and illegal means may become the only option left open. It would not be surprising to discover that many of the areas in United States with black majority have unemployment rates of 40 to 50 per cent. There are few jobs and no one will hire them. Keeping in view that a person had been taken to prison or only arrested, leaves the character of the person doubtful and the employers, therefore, hesitate to hire them. In such circumstances, crime emerges as the only option left. According to Robert, Cullen and Richard (1989) the labelling process is a powerful criminogenic force that stabilizes participation in illegal roles and turns those marginally involved in crime into chronic or career offenders.
This gives rise to a very significant and worth considering point of ‘society creating criminals'. The reactions of the society members make the person feel as if he or she is an alien. Restricting socialisation, limiting employment opportunities, deficit of trust and so on will make an individual think as if he is a professional criminal, though in reality he may be the first time offender, as a result he will try to match the perceptions of others and thus a first time offender develops an intensity to commit crime and becomes a professional criminal. Labelling theorists argue that there is no criminal personality and there is no human being in this world with criminal attributes by birth instead the societal reaction is nevertheless responsible for the offending behaviour of an individual. A very significant phenomenon which is often inter-related with labelling theory is structural factors. Burke in his book (2009) refer to the work of Piliavin and Briar (1964) who looked at police encounters with juveniles and found that arrest decisions were based largely on physical cues- manner, dress and general appearance-from which the officer inferred the character of the youth. Structural factors such as gender, social class, ethnic group and time of day were also significant, thus a young working class, black male in a ‘high delinquency area' at night was seen to have a very high chance of being at least stopped and questioned, if not arrested.
Labelling theory is largely concerned with the criminal rather than crime. The theory mainly focuses on the negative reactions of the society to the deviant which gradually deepens the criminal nature of the offender. Labels can cause future problems therefore they should be avoided.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Hopkins Burke R. (2009). An Introduction to Criminological Theory (Third edition). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
Robert Lilly J, Francis Cullen T & Richard Ball A. (1989). Criminological theory: context and consequences (volume 5). London: SAGE Publications.
Williams III P. & Marylin McShane D. (2004). Criminological Theory (Fourth edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education.