Secondary deviance refers to deviant behavior which flows from a stigma. Any person's self can be stigmatized or tainted by public labeling. Secondary deviance is contrasted to primary deviance which may be behaviorally identical to secondary deviance though incorporated into a ‘normal’ sense of self. Primary deviance is engaging in the initial act of deviance and secondary deviance is the stage in which one internalizes a deviant identity by integrating the initial act of deviance into their self-concept.swiss replica watches One may get drunk because one sees oneself as enjoying a party. However, if one notices that friends are hiding their liquor, one may come to see oneself as a ‘drunk’ and then continue to get drunk because one is a drunkard. The first act is primary deviance and the second act is secondary deviance.
The transition from primary to secondary deviance represents a process of development. - Edwin M. Lemert. Lemert's (1962) analysis of paranoia is a classic example of secondary deviance. Societal reactions are the processes that create, maintain and intensify stigma.
Deviance: Social Constructions and Blurred Boundaries. Leon Anderson draws on up-to-date scholarship across a wide spectrum of deviance categories, providing a symbolic interactionist analysis of the deviance process. The book addresses positivistic theories of deviant behavior within a description of the deviance process that encompasses the work of deviance claims-makers, rule-breakers, and social control agents. The individual's self identity is therefore vulnerable to social judgements and appraisals, and once again we see the constant interplay between mind, self and society (George Herbert Mead).
The work of Erving Goffman showed, when a person is labelled with a particularly 'discrediting' social attribute (such as shyness, perhaps), this can serve as a permanent mark or stigma upon their character.
Charles Lemert suggests that deviance doesn't just happen, with a single instance of behavior. Lemert argues that there is first of all an act that deviates from the normatively expected behavior. That first act probably brings a reaction from the social context because it violates norms. The reaction very often involves admonition not to deviate again, and even punishment. Lemert suggests that some instances of deviance in this pattern are probably simply clumsy and unintended. Punishment and admonition for those acts may provoke a sense of being treated unjustly.
Social Reaction and Secondary Deviance in Culture and Society: The United States and Japan. Freda Adler and William S Laufer, eds. - S G Vincentnathan. Abstract: As an aspect of the individualism emphasized in the United States, the individual is taught to seek personal autonomy and self-importance. Punitive sanctions are important in Japan where prison conditions are harsh by western standards and some offenders are interrogated without regard for their rights. Japan, however, has a much lower criminal recidivism rate than the United States. In explaining recidivism in the United States, the labeling or secondary deviance perspective has some merit. Most individuals in both countries share common perspectives unique to their own cultures.
After a series of such interdependent interactions, eventually the person begins to employ his deviant behavior or a role based upon it as a means of defense, attack, or adjustment to the admonitions and prohibitions that behavior provokes. That point, Lemert refers to as "secondary deviance." - Williams III and McShane's Criminology Theory.
The social reaction to deviant behaviour ensures that the deviant is stigmatised. These social reactions include the deviant being labelled as criminal. However, this label contradicts the self-image of the labelled person and is therefore not role-conform. In order to escape the resulting cognitive dissonance, the individual ultimately adopts the label “deviant” or “criminal” and adapts his or her future behaviour accordingly.
Edwin M. Lemert made a distinction between primary deviance, the initial rule-breaking act, and secondary deviance, the labelled person's response of defense, attack or adaptation to the problems caused by the social reactions to their initial deviance. When this does happen and a person is engaging in secondary deviance, it can be said that they are following a deviant (or moral) career - a set of roles and expectations shaped largely by the reactions of others.
Edwin M. Lemert distinguishes between primary and secondary deviance. An individual first commits primary deviance. Through a process of labelling the individual is forced to play the role of deviant. As a reaction to this role assignment , that “You are criminal!,” the labelled person adapts his behaviour according to the role assigned to him, that is, “Then I am criminal!” This behaviour reaction is called secondary deviance.
Contrary to the conventional labeling perspective that social reaction per se promotes secondary deviance, social reaction provides the context for aggravating secondary deviance. In Japan, the individual admires the society of which he or she is a part. This tendency arises from cultural learning that supports integration of the individual with society. In this context, when socially reacted against, the offender becomes ashamed of the crime, takes the punishment as deserving, and is motivated to prepare for unity with society. Social reaction against offenders in Japan has less recidivistic consequences than in the United States.
Stigmatization Among Probationers
Andreas Schneider, Wayne
McKim.
Abstract: An identity theory perspective defines stigma as negative labeling,
which may either come from others or from within an individual. Drawing on the
concepts of primary and secondary deviance provided by labeling theory, the
authors set out to determine whether probationers experience stigmatization from
within (secondary deviance) or from others in their community (primary
deviance).
Probationers were also asked about their
perceptions of themselves to establish primary deviance. This primary stigmatization was
counterbalanced by the probationers’ perceptions of themselves and from the support
of friends and family members. As a result, probationers did not engage in secondary
deviance to the extent expected due to the contradictions in the different forms of
stigmatization. The support of family and friends is thus extremely important in
destabilizing the stigmatization of others.
An Empirical Evidence Test of Labeling Theory
Using Longitudinal Data
MELVIN C. RAY, WILLIAM R. DOWNS.
This article uses panel data and multiple regression of follow-up on baseline variables to
test direction of causality among drug use behavior, informal
labels, and formal labels. Results partially
supported by the labeling theory proposition of secondary deviance among males, although
changes are suggested in this proposition. Among females, drug use behavior was causally
prior to labels, which contradicts secondary deviance. Thus theories must be tested separately on each sex as well as on samples including both sexes.
The Shell, the Stranger and the Competent Other -
Towards a Sociology of Shyness - Susie Scott.
In Western societies, shyness appears to be an increasingly common
experience, and yet its sociological relevance has been overlooked. Within psychology, the
condition has been seen as an individual pathology, and there has been little attempt to
relate this to the wider cultural context. The argument of this article is that shyness
can be interpreted as both a privately felt state of mind and a publicly recognized social
role. I revisit Mead’s conception of the self as an inner
conversation between the I and the Me,
arguing that the shy actor perceives themselves as relatively unskilled in interaction by
comparison to a Competent Other. It is then suggested that it is normal for
people to drift into isolated episodes of shyness as primary deviance, but that in some
cases the reactions of others can lead to a career of secondary deviance.