Deviance & Social Control

Theories of crime, labelling & social order — A-Level Sociology

Theories of Crime & Deviance

Functionalist — Durkheim

Crime is normal and functional

Some crime is inevitable and even necessary for society. Functions of crime: (1) boundary maintenance — public punishment reinforces norms, (2) social change — deviance can challenge outdated norms (e.g., suffragettes), (3) safety valve — minor deviance prevents more serious challenges to social order. However, too much crime is dysfunctional (anomie).

Merton's Strain Theory

Structural strain between cultural goals and institutional means

American society promotes material success as the cultural goal, but legitimate means (education, employment) are unequally distributed. This strain produces five responses:

Conformity

Accept goals ✓
Accept means ✓
Most common response

Innovation

Accept goals ✓
Reject means ✗
Crime to achieve success (theft, fraud)

Ritualism

Reject goals ✗
Accept means ✓
Going through the motions

Retreatism

Reject goals ✗
Reject means ✗
Drop out (drug addicts, vagrants)

Rebellion

Replace goals ↻
Replace means ↻
Revolutionary movements

Marxist Theories

Chambliss, Box, Snider

Crime is defined and enforced in ways that serve capitalist interests. Laws protect private property and criminalise the poor. Selective enforcement — street crime is policed heavily while corporate crime (fraud, tax evasion, health and safety violations) causes more harm but is under-policed. Capitalism itself is criminogenic — it generates crime through inequality, alienation, and consumerism.

Left Realism

Lea & Young (1984)

Takes crime seriously — it disproportionately affects working-class and ethnic minority communities. Three causes: relative deprivation (feeling deprived compared to others), marginalisation (excluded from political processes), and subculture (collective solutions to shared problems). Advocates practical solutions: community policing, reducing inequality.

Labelling Theory

Becker (1963) — Outsiders

Interactionist perspective

"Deviance is not a quality of the act but rather a consequence of the application of rules and sanctions by others." No act is inherently deviant — it becomes deviant when labelled as such by those with power. The same behaviour may be labelled differently depending on who does it, when, and where.

Lemert — Primary & Secondary Deviance

Primary deviance: Initial deviant act — not publicly labelled, doesn't affect self-concept. Most people commit some deviance.
Secondary deviance: After being caught and labelled, the person internalises the "deviant" identity. The label becomes a master status — it dominates how others see them. They may join deviant subcultures, fulfilling the label (self-fulfilling prophecy).

Cohen — Moral Panics & Folk Devils

Folk Devils and Moral Panics (1972)

The media exaggerates and distorts certain types of deviance, creating moral panics — disproportionate public concern. The group responsible is demonised as folk devils. This leads to a deviancy amplification spiral — more policing → more arrests → appears to confirm the problem → more media attention → more public concern.

Example: Cohen studied the Mods and Rockers in 1960s Britain. Minor scuffles were sensationalised by the media into a national crisis.

Exam tip: Labelling theory is excellent for evaluating other perspectives. Use it to challenge functionalism ("deviance isn't inherently functional — it's socially constructed") and Marxism ("it's not just class — labels are applied based on ethnicity, gender, and age too"). Always give a specific example of labelling in practice.

Social Control

The mechanisms by which society regulates individual behaviour, ensuring conformity to norms and preventing deviance.

Formal Social Control

Control exercised by official agencies with the authority to impose sanctions:

Criminal justice system: Police, courts, prisons — enforce laws through arrest, prosecution, and punishment.
Government: Makes laws (legislation), regulates behaviour.
Education system: Enforces rules through detentions, exclusions, rewards.
Workplace: Contracts, disciplinary procedures, dismissal.

Marxists argue formal control primarily serves ruling-class interests. Foucault: control has become more subtle — surveillance replaces physical punishment.

Informal Social Control

Control through everyday social interactions and socialisation:

Family: Parents teach norms through rewards and punishments. Approval/disapproval shapes behaviour from childhood.
Peer group: Social inclusion/exclusion, ridicule, gossip. Pressure to conform to group norms.
Media: Sets standards of "normal" behaviour. Shaming of deviants.
Religion: Moral codes, fear of divine punishment, community pressure.

Functionalists see informal control as positive — maintaining value consensus. Marxists see it as ideological control — shaping people to accept their position.

Foucault — Surveillance & Discipline

Discipline and Punish (1975)

Modern societies control through surveillance rather than physical punishment. The Panopticon — a prison design where inmates can be watched at any time without knowing when — becomes a metaphor for modern society. CCTV, data collection, and social media mean people self-regulate because they assume they're being watched. Power is invisible but pervasive.

Exam tip: When discussing social control, always consider: who benefits from the control? (Marxist critique), how is control maintained — through force or consent? (Gramsci's hegemony), and has control become more subtle over time? (Foucault). These theoretical links elevate your analysis significantly.