Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance : Videos & Practice Problems

Theories of deviance explore how social structures and interactions influence deviant behavior. Functionalist views, like Durkheim's functions and Merton's strain theory, see deviance as normal, clarifying social boundaries or responding to strain from unequal access to goals. Social disorganization theory links deviance to weak social ties and lack of control in communities. Conflict theory highlights how inequality shapes deviance and sanctions, with high and low socioeconomic status affecting experiences differently. Symbolic interactionist theories, including differential association, labeling, and social bond theory, emphasize deviance as learned, shaped by social interactions, labels, and weakened social bonds.

Introduction of Theoretical Perspective on Deviance

Deviance is a complex social phenomenon understood through various theoretical perspectives that explain its role and origins within society. From a functionalist viewpoint, deviance is seen as a normal and necessary part of social life. It helps clarify social boundaries by defining what behaviors are acceptable and which are not, thereby enhancing social cohesion. When a society collectively agrees on certain behaviors as deviant, it reinforces a shared sense of belonging among its members. This perspective emphasizes that deviance is inevitable and serves important functions such as maintaining social order and unity. Key theories within this framework include Durkheim’s functions of deviance, strain theory, and social disorganization theory, all of which explore how deviance contributes to the stability and functioning of society.

In contrast, the conflict perspective focuses on the role of inequality in wealth, power, and resources as the root causes of deviance. This approach argues that deviance arises as a response to social and economic disparities, where those with less power may engage in deviant behavior due to limited opportunities. Moreover, laws and social norms are often designed to protect the interests of the powerful, using formal sanctions as tools of social control. Deviance, from this angle, is inherently political, reflecting struggles over power and resources. The distinction between crimes committed by individuals of high versus low socioeconomic status (SES) highlights how deviance is differentially defined and punished based on social position.

The symbolic interactionist perspective offers a micro-level analysis, focusing on individual interactions and the social construction of deviance. Here, deviance is understood as a learned behavior or attitude that emerges through social interactions. It is not fixed but variable and context-dependent, meaning that what is considered deviant can change depending on the social environment and cultural norms. This perspective includes theories such as differential association theory, which explains deviance as learned through association with others; labeling theory, which examines how being labeled as deviant influences identity and behavior; and control theory, which explores the social bonds that prevent deviance. Together, these theories highlight the dynamic and fluid nature of deviance as shaped by everyday social processes.

Functionalist Perspective - Durkheim

Emile Durkheim's perspective on deviance offers a functionalist view that sees deviance as a normal and necessary part of society. He introduced the concept of the collective conscience, which refers to the shared beliefs, morals, and attitudes that form the foundation of social norms. Deviance, according to Durkheim, is a violation of this collective conscience and plays a crucial role in maintaining and evolving societal order.

Deviance serves four key functions, which vary depending on whether society agrees or disagrees with the deviant behavior. When society disagrees with deviance, it helps to affirm societal values and beliefs by clearly defining what is acceptable and what is not. This process establishes social boundaries, creating a clear distinction between acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. Additionally, this shared disapproval fosters social cohesion, as members of society unite in their collective rejection of the deviant act, reinforcing a sense of belonging and unity within the group.

Conversely, when society agrees with the deviant behavior, deviance can become a catalyst for social change. This acceptance may lead to informal shifts in social norms or even formal changes such as amendments in laws and policies. In this way, deviance challenges the status quo and can drive progress by encouraging society to reconsider and potentially revise its collective conscience.

Durkheim’s analysis highlights that deviance is not merely a disruption but a dynamic force that either strengthens social order or promotes transformation. Understanding deviance through this lens emphasizes its dual role in both reinforcing and evolving the social fabric.

Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance Example 1

According to Émile Durkheim, deviance plays a crucial and functional role in society by contributing to social cohesion and change. When members of a society collectively disapprove of certain deviant behaviors, this shared disapproval reinforces social boundaries, clearly defining what is acceptable and unacceptable within the community. This collective agreement strengthens social unity, as individuals feel connected through their common values and norms.

Conversely, when a significant portion of society begins to accept or agree with previously deviant behavior, this can act as a catalyst for social change. Such acceptance may lead to shifts in societal attitudes, potentially resulting in new laws or modifications to existing ones. Thus, deviance not only maintains social order by clarifying norms but also promotes progress by challenging outdated or unjust rules, highlighting its dual role in both preserving and transforming society.

According to Durkheim, deviance is the violation of (the) __________?

• A. Law.
• B. Morals.
• C. Rituals.
• D. Collective consciousness.

Answer: (D)

Functionalist Perspective - Strain Theory

Robert Merton's strain theory builds on the functionalist perspective by explaining deviance as a response to the social pressures individuals face when they lack the appropriate resources to achieve society's conventional goals. In this context, conventional goals refer to what society expects individuals to accomplish, such as financial success. Conventional means are the socially accepted methods to reach these goals, like pursuing higher education and securing employment.

Strain occurs when there is a disconnect between these goals and the means available to achieve them, creating pressure that influences deviant behavior. Merton identified five ways individuals adapt to this strain based on whether they accept or reject societal goals and means. When both goals and means are accepted, individuals conform by following societal norms, such as working a traditional job to earn money.

If individuals accept the goal but reject the conventional means, they innovate by finding alternative, often deviant, ways to achieve success, such as engaging in criminal activities to make money. Conversely, ritualism occurs when individuals abandon the goal but continue to adhere to the accepted means, performing societal roles without internalizing the desired outcomes, like working a job without ambition for financial gain.

Retreatism involves rejecting both societal goals and means, leading individuals to withdraw from societal expectations entirely, which might manifest as living off the grid or becoming reclusive. Rebellion, distinct from retreatism, involves rejecting and actively replacing conventional goals and means with new, unconventional ones, often resulting in extremist behaviors seen in groups like cults or terrorists.

Merton’s strain theory highlights how social structure and access to resources shape deviant behavior, emphasizing the role of societal expectations in influencing individual actions. This theory provides a framework for understanding the diverse ways people respond to social pressure, from conformity to radical rebellion, illustrating the complex relationship between societal goals, means, and deviance.

Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance Example 2

Merton's strain theory explains how individuals respond to societal goals and the means available to achieve them, categorizing behaviors into conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. For example, someone like Janie, who performs her job competently but lacks motivation to advance or pursue societal success aggressively, exemplifies ritualism. She adheres to societal norms by maintaining her job but has abandoned the goal of achieving higher status or wealth.

In contrast, Sophie represents innovation. She desires material success, such as buying designer purses, but rejects conventional methods like education and honest work. Instead, she resorts to illegitimate means, such as stealing credit card information, to achieve her goals. Innovation in this context refers to adopting new, often deviant, strategies to reach culturally approved objectives.

Chloe illustrates conformity by embracing both societal goals and the accepted means to achieve them. Her ambition to own a large house and her pursuit of a medical career align with conventional expectations, demonstrating adherence to both cultural goals and institutionalized pathways.

Finally, Zoe embodies retreatism by rejecting both societal goals and the means to achieve them. Choosing to live off-grid in a cottage, she withdraws from conventional social expectations without necessarily seeking alternative goals or engaging in deviant behavior. Retreatism involves a withdrawal from the pressures of societal success and the prescribed methods to attain it.

Understanding these categories helps clarify how individuals navigate societal pressures and the diverse ways they respond to the strain between cultural goals and institutionalized means.

Which of the following most accurately describes deviance according to strain theory?

• A. Deviance is necessary for social cohesion.
• B. Deviance is the result of unemployment and poverty, which are natural parts of all societies.
• C. Deviance is an unnatural part of society that arises from the unequal distribution of resources between business owners and workers.
• D. Deviance may arise when someone has insufficient means to meet goals.

Answer: (D)

Functionalist Perspective - Social Disorganization Theory

Social disorganization theory, rooted in functionalist perspectives, explains deviance as a natural outcome of societal conditions rather than individual pathology. Developed by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay through their research in low-income Chicago neighborhoods from the 1920s to the 1940s, this theory emphasizes the critical role of social ties and social control in influencing deviant behavior.

At the core of social disorganization theory is the idea that weak social ties—both at the family and community levels—contribute significantly to deviance. Factors such as unstable family structures, limited community resources, and underfunded schools can undermine the social cohesion necessary to foster conformity and discourage deviant acts. These weak social bonds reduce the community’s ability to regulate behavior effectively.

In addition to weak social ties, a lack of social control is a key contributor to deviance. Social control can be formal, such as police presence and legal sanctions, or informal, including social norms and community enforcement like social shaming. When neighborhoods experience diminished formal control due to inadequate policing or reduced informal control because residents become desensitized to deviance, the likelihood of deviant behavior increases.

Research also highlights the strong correlation between poverty, family disruption (such as single-parent households or parental incarceration), and higher rates of deviance and crime. These environmental factors create conditions where social disorganization thrives, leading to increased deviant behavior.

Ultimately, social disorganization theory posits that deviance arises from the environment. Communities characterized by weak social ties and insufficient social control are more prone to producing deviant individuals. This perspective underscores the importance of strengthening community bonds and enhancing social control mechanisms to reduce deviance and promote social order.

Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance Example 3

Social disorganization theory explains deviance by focusing on the breakdown of social institutions and community structures, such as weak social ties and insufficient social control. Communities with underfunded schools and a high proportion of single-parent families often experience a lack of resources and family disruption, which contribute to higher rates of deviance. Similarly, neighborhoods with high unemployment and poverty levels tend to have increased deviance and crime due to economic strain and weakened social cohesion. In contrast, communities that frequently engage in social events and maintain strong social bonds exhibit greater social control, reducing the likelihood of deviant behavior. Therefore, deviance is most common in neighborhoods characterized by resource scarcity, family instability, and economic hardship, as these factors undermine the community’s ability to regulate behavior effectively.

Conflict Perspective

The conflict perspective on deviance emphasizes how social inequality shapes the experience and consequences of deviant behavior. Individuals with low power often face limited legitimate opportunities to achieve success, such as earning money through conventional means, due to their position at the bottom of the social hierarchy. This lack of access increases the likelihood that they may engage in deviant acts as alternative means to attain their goals. Furthermore, deviant labels like "criminal" or "felon" tend to have a more severe and lasting impact on low-power individuals, restricting their access to essential resources such as housing and employment, thereby perpetuating their marginalization.

In contrast, high-power individuals experience deviance differently. Laws are frequently created or enforced in ways that protect the interests of those in power, and deviant labels often carry less severe consequences for them. For example, a wealthy person might only face a fine they can easily afford or a temporary leave from work rather than losing their job entirely. This disparity is reinforced by societal beliefs that laws are inherently just, which discourages critical examination of legal systems that may perpetuate inequality.

Historically, crimes associated with high-power individuals, such as white-collar crime—illegal acts committed within business environments—have been punished less harshly than street crimes. Organized crime, involving networks that supply illegal goods or services (e.g., the mob), and hate crimes—offenses targeting individuals based on identity—have also been part of this discussion. While hate crimes and organized crime are now often punished more severely, white-collar crimes still tend to receive lighter penalties on average.

This analysis highlights the significant differences in how deviance is experienced and sanctioned across social strata, illustrating the role of power and inequality in shaping societal responses to deviant behavior.

Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance Example 4

From a conflict perspective, the approach to deviance and punishment reveals significant disparities rooted in social inequality. Historically, white-collar crimes—offenses committed by individuals of high social status during their professional activities—have been punished less severely than street crimes, which are typically associated with lower socioeconomic groups. This discrepancy highlights how power and privilege influence the criminal justice system's responses.

Individuals with low power are more vulnerable to the lasting impacts of deviant labels. When labeled as deviant, low-power individuals often face severe social and legal consequences that can disrupt their lives permanently. In contrast, high-power individuals frequently possess the financial resources and social connections to mitigate or avoid the full consequences of their deviant acts, demonstrating how social status affects the experience of deviance.

The conflict perspective identifies inequality as the fundamental cause of deviance. It argues that societal structures are designed to maintain the dominance of powerful groups, which leads to unequal definitions and enforcement of norms. This inequality fosters conditions where deviance is both a product of and a response to social stratification, emphasizing the role of power dynamics in shaping what is considered deviant behavior.

True or False: if false, choose the answer that best corrects the statement.
The conflict perspective views deviance as a normal part of society that helps it function.

• A. True.
• B. False, conflict perspective views deviance as individual shortcomings.
• C. False, conflict perspective views deviance as the result of biology.
• D. False, conflict perspective views deviance as the result of social inequality.

Answer: (D)

Symbolic Interactionist Perspective - Differential Association and Labeling Theory

Symbolic interactionist perspectives on deviance focus on micro-level social interactions to understand why individuals engage in deviant behavior. Two key theories within this framework are differential association theory and labeling theory, both emphasizing the role of socialization and self-identity in deviance.

Edwin Sutherland's differential association theory posits that deviance is a learned behavior, acquired through socialization with others who engage in or endorse deviant acts. This theory highlights that individuals are more likely to adopt deviant behaviors and beliefs if their close associates do so. For example, research by Little and Rankin (2001) demonstrated that teenage girls whose friends were permissive of sexual behavior were more likely to engage in similar behaviors themselves. This illustrates how social environments and peer groups influence the likelihood of deviance by shaping attitudes and actions.

In contrast, labeling theory, developed by Edwin Lemert, explores how being labeled as deviant affects a person's self-image and future behavior. This theory emphasizes the social reaction to deviance and how it can reinforce or escalate deviant behavior over time. Lemert distinguished between primary deviance and secondary deviance. Primary deviance involves minor infractions, such as telling a white lie or stealing a cookie, which typically provoke minimal social reaction and have little impact on self-identity.

Secondary deviance, however, refers to more serious violations, often involving legal consequences, which elicit stronger societal reactions and can lead to stigma—a powerful negative label that profoundly influences a person's self-concept. When an individual is repeatedly stigmatized, their master status—the dominant identity they hold—may shift to that of a deviant or criminal. This internalized label increases the likelihood of continued deviant behavior, as the person begins to see themselves primarily through this deviant identity.

Understanding these theories provides insight into how deviance is not only a product of individual choices but also deeply rooted in social interactions and the meanings assigned by society. The interplay between socialization, labeling, and self-identity explains why some individuals persist in deviant behavior, highlighting the importance of social context in shaping human behavior.

Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance Example 5

Understanding the difference between primary and secondary deviance is essential in analyzing how norm violations affect individuals and their social identities. Primary deviance refers to minor norm violations that typically provoke limited social reaction and do not significantly alter a person's self-image or social status. For example, cheating on a spelling test in elementary school, when discovered by friends, usually results in mild disapproval but does not follow the individual long-term or change their master status.

In contrast, secondary deviance involves more serious norm violations that elicit strong social reactions, often formal sanctions, and lead to a transformation in how individuals view themselves and how society labels them. Selling drugs and being convicted, cheating on a spouse with coworkers finding out, or driving drunk and causing an accident are all examples of secondary deviance. These actions typically result in significant social and legal consequences, deeply impacting the individual's self-image and potentially altering their master status—the dominant social identity that shapes how they are perceived and how they perceive themselves.

The concept of master status is crucial here, as it represents the primary identifying characteristic that influences a person's social interactions and opportunities. When deviant behavior leads to a change in master status, it can redefine a person's role in society, often in a stigmatizing way. This shift is more likely with secondary deviance due to the intensity of social reactions and the lasting impact on self-identity.

In summary, minor norm violations with limited social consequences are classified as primary deviance, while serious violations with strong social and legal repercussions that alter self-image and social identity are secondary deviance. Recognizing these distinctions helps in understanding the social processes behind labeling, stigma, and identity transformation.

Differential Association Theory states that deviance is....

• A. Learned through social interactions.
• B. The result of being labeled as deviant.
• C. The result of weak social bonds.
• D. Often the result of inequality.

Answer: (A)

Symbolic Interactionist Perspective - Control Theory

Social bond theory, developed by Travis Hirschi in the 1960s, offers a symbolic interactionist perspective on deviance by focusing on what prevents deviant behavior rather than why it occurs. Hirschi's research, which involved studying thousands of adolescent boys, revealed that strong social bonds significantly reduce the likelihood of engaging in deviant acts. These social bonds act as a form of social control, encouraging conformity to societal norms and discouraging behaviors that could jeopardize one’s future.

Hirschi identified four key elements of social bonds that help prevent deviance. The first is attachment, which refers to the emotional connections individuals have with family, friends, and others. Strong attachments foster a sense of belonging and accountability, reducing the desire to engage in deviant behavior. The second element, commitment, involves an individual’s investment in conventional goals such as education, career, marriage, and homeownership. The more committed a person is to these traditional societal goals, the less likely they are to risk deviance that could threaten their achievements.

The third element, involvement, describes the time and energy devoted to organized activities within the community, such as clubs, sports, or volunteer work. Active involvement limits opportunities for deviance by occupying individuals with positive, structured engagements. Lastly, belief encompasses respect for societal norms, morals, and authority figures. When individuals uphold these shared values, they are less inclined to violate social rules.

According to social bond theory, deviance is more likely to occur when these social bonds weaken or are absent. Hirschi argued that most people do not inherently desire to be deviant; rather, deviance arises when social ties are insufficient to encourage conformity. For example, a group like Boy Scouts typically exhibits strong social bonds through friendships, commitment to education and community involvement, and respect for moral standards, making deviance less probable. In contrast, a street gang may lack these bonds, increasing the likelihood of deviant behavior.

Social bond theory highlights the importance of nurturing strong interpersonal relationships, commitment to societal goals, active community participation, and shared moral beliefs as essential factors in preventing deviance and promoting social order.

Theoretical Perspective on Deviance Example 6

According to Hirschi's social control theory, individuals with weaker social bonds are more likely to engage in deviant behavior. Social bonds refer to the connections a person has with family, friends, and community, which create a sense of attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief in societal norms. For example, someone like Sanjay, who has strong family ties, clear educational goals, and active community involvement, demonstrates strong social bonds that reduce the likelihood of deviance.

In contrast, Jason exhibits weak social bonds: he is no longer close with his family, shows little interest in career goals, and has minimal community involvement. This lack of attachment, commitment, and involvement increases his risk of engaging in deviant acts according to the theory. Meanwhile, Kim, who enjoys her job, has friendly relationships with coworkers, and actively participates in community events, maintains strong social bonds that discourage deviance.

Thus, Hirschi's control theory emphasizes that the strength of social bonds—attachment to others, commitment to conventional goals, involvement in activities, and belief in societal rules—plays a crucial role in preventing deviant behavior. Individuals with the weakest social ties, like Jason, are most likely to engage in deviance because they lack these protective social connections.

Here’s what students ask on this topic:

What are the main theoretical perspectives on deviance in sociology?

The main theoretical perspectives on deviance in sociology include the functionalist, conflict, and symbolic interactionist perspectives. The functionalist perspective views deviance as a normal part of society that helps clarify social boundaries and promote social cohesion or change. The conflict perspective emphasizes how inequality in power and resources leads to deviance, often highlighting how laws protect those in power. The symbolic interactionist perspective focuses on micro-level interactions, explaining deviance as learned behavior through socialization, the impact of deviant labels on self-identity, and the role of social bonds in preventing deviance. Each perspective offers unique insights into why deviance occurs and how society responds to it.

How does Emile Durkheim's functionalist perspective explain the role of deviance in society?

Emile Durkheim's functionalist perspective sees deviance as a normal and necessary part of society. He argued that deviance serves four key functions: it affirms cultural values and norms, clarifies social boundaries, promotes social cohesion by uniting people against deviant behavior, and can encourage social change when society begins to accept previously deviant acts. Durkheim believed deviance violates the collective conscience—the shared beliefs and morals of society—and that society's reaction to deviance helps maintain social order or adapt to new norms.

What is Robert Merton's strain theory and how does it explain deviant behavior?

Robert Merton's strain theory, a functionalist approach, explains deviance as a response to the pressure individuals feel when they cannot achieve society's conventional goals through accepted means. Merton identified five modes of individual adaptation: conformity (accepting goals and means), innovation (accepting goals but using illegitimate means), ritualism (rejecting goals but accepting means), retreatism (rejecting both goals and means), and rebellion (rejecting and replacing goals and means). This theory highlights how unequal access to resources can lead people to deviant behavior as an alternative way to achieve societal goals.

How does social disorganization theory link community environment to deviance?

Social disorganization theory suggests that deviance arises from a community's weak social ties and lack of social control. Developed by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay, this theory focuses on how factors like poverty, family disruption, underfunded schools, and low police presence contribute to an environment where deviance is more likely. When social bonds within families and communities are weak, and formal or informal social controls are lacking, individuals are more prone to engage in deviant behavior. Thus, deviance is seen as a product of the social environment rather than individual pathology.

What does the conflict perspective say about the relationship between power and deviance?

The conflict perspective views deviance as a result of social inequality, emphasizing how power differences shape what is considered deviant and how laws are enforced. It argues that those in power create laws and norms to protect their interests, often criminalizing behaviors of lower-power groups while excusing or minimizing deviance among the powerful. For example, white-collar crimes by high-status individuals may be punished less harshly than street crimes. This perspective highlights how deviance is political and reflects struggles over wealth and power in society.

How do symbolic interactionist theories explain the learning and labeling of deviant behavior?

Symbolic interactionist theories focus on how deviance is learned and socially constructed through interactions. Differential association theory posits that deviance is learned behavior influenced by the attitudes and behaviors of those we associate with. Labeling theory explains how being labeled as deviant can affect a person's self-identity, leading to secondary deviance where the individual internalizes the label and continues deviant behavior. These theories emphasize the dynamic and context-dependent nature of deviance, showing how social interactions shape who becomes deviant and how they see themselves.

What is social control theory and how does it explain the prevention of deviance?

Social control theory, also known as social bond theory, explains deviance prevention by focusing on the strength of an individual's social bonds. Developed by Travis Hirschi, it identifies four types of social bonds that reduce deviance: attachment (connections to others), commitment (investment in conventional goals), involvement (participation in community activities), and belief (respect for social norms and authority). When these bonds are strong, individuals are less likely to engage in deviant behavior because they have more to lose. Conversely, weak social bonds increase the likelihood of deviance.