New version page

FSU CCJ 3011 - FINAL EXAM REVIEW FROM BOOKS

Upgrade to remove ads

This preview shows page 1-2-19-20 out of 20 pages.

Save
View Full Document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 20 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 20 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 20 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 20 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Upgrade to remove ads
Unformatted text preview:

Prenatal exposure to testosteronePrenatal exposure to toxinsCCJ3011 FINAL EXAM REVIEW FROM BOOKSBeaver: p. 157-174; p. 135-139Brown: ch.9; p.422-435; p.120-137; ch.11; ch.12Brown Chapter 9 - All theories covered so far share a common characteristic:• Focus on the act of offending.• Explanations vary between theories, but focus on the acts itself.- Social process theories take a different approach• Don’t place emphasis on the act.• Focus on how the act is responded to• How do social control agents respond to the act? (Includes formal and informal agents)• Individual is a passive being who is forced into criminal behavior by social forces (by societal definitions or by the reactions of others)• Not only does the offenders behavior elicit social responses, physical characteristics & demeanor play a role too (Race/ethnicity are some of the most important)-Social Context• Became highly popular in the 1960’s and 1970’so Civil rights movemento Vietnam War Protestso Assassinations of JFK, MLK, and Robert Kennedyo Political corruption of Nixon administration (e.g., Watergate scandal)• Spurred mistrust of government (Wide-scale questioning of authority)-Two social reaction theories: Labeling Theory and Conflict CriminologyLabeling Theory• Foundation in symbolic interactionism (How others view us results in changes in behavior)• Key concept: Looking glass selfo The way we believe others view us is how we see ourselves/ We see ourselves through• How we think others see us is importanto Changes how we think about ourselveso Used to create who we think we are supposed to beo Can change our behavior (changes to support how we think we are supposed to act)• Humans constantly adapt to otherso Have to react to the way we are seeno Can result in dramatic changes at essentially any time• Responses from the criminal justice system may result in dramatic changeso Individual may reevaluate his/her identityo Others may reevaluate perceptions of the individual Begin to see the individual as antisocial or a criminal Perceive the person as a potentially negative influence or dangerouso Results in differences in our perceptions of ourselves.  Becomes a “self-fulfilling prophecy”• Major issues identified by labeling theorist:1. Primary importance to labeling theorist is what transpires after the act, not what caused or precipitated the act (primary deviance).2. Deviance is a property conferred upon an act; it is not something inherent in the act (it is socially assigned).3. Labeling of an individual is a process of symbolic interactionism between the “deviant” and significant others (secondary deviance).4. The labeling process is affected by those who label and how the labeled person reacts.5. Labeling may lead to retrospective interpretation of the individual’s prior behavior (for example, a crazy looking haircut you did before the crime, after the crime people will think you are definitely a deviant person because of how you look). Deviant label becomes “master status”. Behaviors reinforce new master status of “criminal”.6. A deviant label will override other personal attributes. The probability of further criminal behavior (secondary deviance) is enhanced (it increases).• Dramatization of Evil (Frank Tannenbaum)o Criminals are not inherently different from the rest of the population, but that specific acts in a person’s range of behaviors are brought to the public’s attention.o Legal relativism: acts are neither inherently good nor evil. There are varying degrees of good and evil and the social audience influences a label placed upon specific behaviors. The same behavior engaged by individuals in a different social status or setting may have a different response. (being drunk at a party vs. being drunk before an exam)• Primary and Secondary deviation (Edwin M. Lemert)o Primary deviation: occasional/situational behavior that may be excused by the actor or the social audience. Going 45mph in 30mph zone This deviance IS NOT fundamental or caused by the person’s identity/self-concept but is very spontaneous and situational.o Secondary deviation: dynamic interaction between the individual’s deviation and the societal response to the deviation. Once the process of secondary deviation results in labeling the individual, it is difficult to escape the classification as a deviant. Official reactions such as arrests, courts hearings, and investigations usually exacerbate (worsen) the situation and cause dramatic redefinition of the self.• Four types of deviants and non-deviantso Conformist: perceived by society in terms of their actual behaviors.o Pure deviant: perceived by society in terms of their actual behaviors. (norm-violating behaviors)o Falsely accused: identified as deviants/criminals due to their sex, age, race, social status, peers, and physical appearance, not because of their behavior. (their behavior is usually conforming)o Secret deviant: many criminal violations never brought to the police’s attention. These individuals avoid detection and witnesses fail to impose a criminal/deviant label on their actions.• Central ideas of labeling theory oppose deterrence theoryo Seen as directly competing theories• Labeling Theory vs. Deterrenceoo Labeling Theory  No reason to focus on primary deviance CJS intervention causes negative changes Punishment increases subsequent criminal behavior (secondary deviance)o Deterrence Theory  Focus on primary deviance CJS should increase punishment Punishment decreases likelihood of criminal behaviorResearch on labeling theoryo Research tends to be fairly supportiveo People with contact with the CJS are more likely to commit more crimeo Engage in “Secondary deviance”-Meta-analysis (Huizinga & Henry, 2008)o Majority of studies find that offending remains the same or increases after arresto Very few (only 2) found decreases in offending after an arrestConflict Criminology• Consensus View :Most theories operate under specific assumptions about societyo Common values among members existso Society/ state protects the general interests of the peopleo Society/state works to resolve conflicts in ways that best suits all members• Conflict Perspective: Some criminologists have questioned these assumptionso Argue that society is made up of distinct groups with opposing values and interestso Society/state represents the values/interests of groups with the most


View Full Document
Download FINAL EXAM REVIEW FROM BOOKS
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view FINAL EXAM REVIEW FROM BOOKS and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view FINAL EXAM REVIEW FROM BOOKS 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?