SOC week 1 notes
SOC week 1 notes 12326
Popular in Deviance (Soc 213-001)
Popular in Sociology
Kaylee Renner MD
verified elite notetaker
This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Brianna Balzer-Martinez on Sunday January 31, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to 12326 at University of New Mexico taught by Professor Niame Adele in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 60 views. For similar materials see Deviance (Soc 213-001) in Sociology at University of New Mexico.
Reviews for SOC week 1 notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 01/31/16
SOC notes Week 1 Deviance- behavior that falls outside of normative parameters Cultural lag- the phenomenon of social practices that norms falling behind technical or otherwise factual realities Sectors of society change at different rates I.e. Like our economy The absolutist position- there are behaviors which are inherently improper or maybe classified as immoral, evil, or abnormal The rightness or wrongness of behaviors transcends the interest of individuals or groups and constraints should be placed Essentializing- attribution inherent or natural traits to an individual or group, what one is, or what they are I.e. if you drink you are an alcoholic The relativists position- society and humans are dynamic and mutable, the behaviors that are identified as deviant are a matter of evaluation and shifting interests of any given time or culture Deviance is not unnatural, nor is it intrinsic to any act or behavior I.e. You are praying to God every night, if you start telling people you and God are talking then you may end up in a psych ward Stereotype threat- simply being reminded that one is a part of a stereotyped group will change behavior I.e. Drug dealers have no scruples Theoretical models Functionalists- (from Durkheim) theories that claim that deviance while undesirable are necessary or serves social functions Functionalist models focus on social agreement and order I.e. It's deviant if the public says its deviant Deviance and crime exist in all society and only become dysfunctional when rates are too high or too low Too low indicates lack of change or innovation Too high indicates disorganization or excessive control Durkheims functions of deviance and crime Creates boundaries and norms for acceptable bahaviors Reinforces society's values Unites society against the bad behaviors or people Society cannot absolutely control members, i.e. Some deviance allows for creativity Anomic- (normalness) Durkheims model of social balances requires the right amounts of integration and regulation in society A breakdown of established social order or deregulation, creates anomic Society not the individual creates deviance I.e. Lack of boundaries Chicago school- social disorganization and pathology of rapidly growing and diversifying communities Change causes disruption unstable systems disintegration Robert Merton- anomic/strain- society sets achievement goals for people then fails to provide sufficient means to meet these goals I.e. Society encourages people to engage in deviant behavior Mertons five types of adaption- 1968 Albert Cohen- status frustration- people from all classes must find a way to achieve a desired group status, which inspires innovation responses in lower classes Cloward and Ohlin- differential opportunity- a subculture must provide the opportunity for using illegitimate means Opportunnity structures are created by access- more crime in cities then in rural areas Criminal subculture- requires the willingness to participate in a crime Conflict subculture- requires the willingness to participate with a violent “fighting” group or gang Retreatest subculture- requires a willingness to use or sell drugs- this is a double failure Critique o What is the evidence that lower class people are more likely to engage in deviant behavior? Police are more likely to patrol lower class environments, to focus on more “serious” violations. o Succes and aspiration may not be the same for different classes and ethnic groups- differential expectations and socialization Social learning theory Sutherland- differential socialization- people acquire ideas and practices of behavior from those they most closely associate with This is favorable to deviance and an abundance of these definitions teaches a person to deviate Glazer- differential identification- exposure is not enough one must one must also positively identify with and want to emulate behaviors and beliefs Burgess and Akers- differential reinforcement- we engage in or continue behaviors because they are rewards for doing so (also cost for not doing so) we choose behaviors we get more satisfaction from Critique o How to test exposure and measure it? How to test identification or satisfaction requires self-reporting. o What instigates an in initial act of deviance Control theory - find out what causes conformity and look for what it is missing. Lack of social control leads to deviance/crime. Crime theory asks what causes crime or deviance. While control theory asks what causes conformity formal controls as official structures and agents. Informal control as a community or intimate enforcement of values and norms Bonding theory – Travis Hirishi Designed initially to explain juvenile delinquency- weak bonds (to parents and educational authorities) leads to deviance 4 components 1. Attachment to other/weak attachment=insensitivity 2. Commitment creates a stake 3. Involvement creates mutual interests 4. Belief in the rightness of the values=internal control Lack of impulsive control or weak self-control= strong relation to deviance Reintegrative shaming- John Braithwaite- we are controlled informally through shaming. Violating social norms or committing crimes needs to be shamed publicly. Reintegration allows the offender to show remorse, accept punishment, then be. Returned to the group as expunged of “badness” or to start over. Disintegrative shaming- extends the shame to stigma or ostracism, not allowing the offender the option of being re-accepted to the group Deterrence doctrine- as formal social control- assumes that people are rational and will not engage in deviant acts if they know they will be punished 3 components 1. severity of punishment 2. Certainty of being caught and punished 3. Swiftness of consequences General deterrence- intended to capture the collective imagination Specific deterrence- directed the individual- increasingly severe consequences for DUI Critique o Do work bonds create deviance or does deviance destroy bonds o Poor self control may cause some act out, but some deviance requires high level of self control o Reintegration shaming may work with the first time offenders and has been shown to work with juveniles, repeat offenders usually have no interest in being reintegrated into society o Deterrence works on those who can be influenced as in domestic violence but severity, may have a contrary effect on those who are against the “system” o There is a general failure to see control as a possible cause of deviance Constructionist theory – deviance a concept and constructed in a social interaction Functionalist theory rooted in conservative views- the social order must be right because it serves functions of cohesion I.e. Couples cohabitation without marriage= deviance Functionalism is positivist perspective- we can use science to understand society and create policy and social forms to make a better society work Constructionist would look at how people create a notion of deviance around a social phenomenon like cohabitation Labeling theory from symbolic interactionism- people giving significance or meaning to a behavior We must ask who labels whom and what is that social relationship? Law enforcement has a stake, judicial systems also have a stake Is social power the determining factor and who has the authority to label? Consequences for labeled- second deviance- stronger then learning theory Consequences for the labeler-generally positive, reinforces both personal statuses and community identity Critique o Doesn't explain primary deviance o Inconsistent research findings- teenage boys sent to D home more likely to engage in more deviance, but teenage girls labeled “sluts” are less likely to engage in promiscuity o Doesn't account for the deviance of the powerful or hidden deviance
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'