International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 607

ISSN 2229-5518

Theory of Labeling: Contemporary

Concepts of the Sociological Understanding
of Deviance
Aleksandar Jovanoski Ph. D.1 Agron Rustemi Ph. D.2

Abstract - The paper presents an overview of the emergence, establishment and current status with the latest development of
labeling theory within sociological paradigms - especially in the area of sociological explanation of the causes of social deviations.
In addition to the bioanthropological, psychological, medical, and criminological explanations for the causes of deviant behavior,
the theory of labeling is one of several sociological theories besides the theory of anomie, the theory of differential association,
the theory of self-esteem, and the theory of self-control. Starting with the early work of the founders of the theory of labeling
Howard Baker in the early 1960s, and Erwin Goffman on the impact of stigma on people with disabilities and the construction of
their social identity, the text examines the latest achievements to this theory, which considers the causes of deviant behavior
solely as a reflection of the social reaction. The theory of labeling belongs to the wider circle of theories for the social construction
of deviant behavior. The paper also lists the critiques of the theory of labeling. The re-actualization of the sociological interest in
the theory of labeling in recent years is conditioned by the impact that the Internet has on everyday life and thus on our own

IJSER
experience of ourselves and the perception of our experience in the eyes of others. Today in the era of viral and networked society,
the perception of others about us greatly influences the decision to start a deviant life.

Index Terms: Howard Baker, label, labeling, stigma, Erwin Goffman, social deviation.

——————————  ——————————
behavior, and second, what is the instance that prescribes the
1. INTRODUCTION
criteria for acceptable and unacceptable behavior?
he problem of defining human behavior is very old and can
T be said to date back to the very beginnings of the
organization of human society. The desire of people, from
Regarding the second question, there is a wide range of answers
to date, and depending on the periodization of the development
of society, the sources of social morality are: the council of
ancient times to live in meaningful and organized communities, elders, the tribal elder, the tribal sorcerer, the powerful houses
pushed them into the process of building appropriate systems of slave owners, the church, the feudal lords, the state, and
of values, norms, customs, and in response to them and today it is a global society in which the rapid development of
sanctions. These elements of culture later grew into institutes communications and information technology has contributed to
and institutions that constitute the basic structure of later the Internet playing a significant role in defining the good and
political institutions and states. With the further process of the bad; of the acceptable and the unacceptable. Today, as never
standardization within the institutional response to the growing before in human history, we are witnessing the rapid and
needs for division of labor and specialized knowledge, skills instantaneous emergence and development of new values,
and art, the need to define acceptable and unacceptable ways to norms and cultural patterns of behavior, which are also rapidly
achieve individual goals has grown. At that moment or stage of becoming redundant and outdated. As for the answer to the first
development of human society, the need arises to define normal question, i.e., the content of social morality today, in the era of
and acceptable behavior versus abnormal and unacceptable. consumerism and the internet revolution, we can say that it is
From time immemorial, the process of determining the socially quite fluid, and moral relativism seems to be living its golden
acceptable behavior of individuals and groups has been age. Attempts to scientifically explain the origins and motives
followed by two major questions: first, what constitutes the of deviant behavior have led sociology to produce a number of
content of social morality that ascribes permissible patterns of theories. Sociological theories in addition to those of biology,

1
Aleksandar Jovanoski is an associate professor at the Faculty of Law - Kicevo with over 15 years of academic career. University of St. Clement
of Ohrid – Bitola, Law Faculty – Kicevo, Republic of N. Macedonia aleksandarjovanoski3@[Link]
2
Agron Rustemi is an associate professor at the Faculty of Contemporary Social Sciences with over 15 years of academic career. University of
South-Eastern Europe Tetovo, Republic of N. Macedonia [Link]@[Link]

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 608
ISSN 2229-5518

anthropology and psychology today constitute a branched Jews in the Second World War, who, given the consequences,
theoretical approach that is easily recognizable in have no counterpart in the human history of stigmatization.
sociopathological and criminological etiology. Starting from The process of stigmatization implies the determination of
different positions in determining the source of deviant and negative values and attributes by the community or society
criminal behavior, these scientific approaches point out various towards an individual (or group) so that the group, community
reasons for deviations, according to some are the biological, or wider society that appears as an emitter of stigma has a
inherited and most often unchanging characteristics of man, superior position and disparages the omnipotent individual or
according to others the psychological characteristics of the the weaker group. Hence, the process of stigmatization is based
person and the internal life are to blame for deviant behavior. on economic, political but often legal inequalities that exist in
response to various stimuli, while others accuse society and the society, and stereotypes and prejudices are often the basis of
environment that surrounds the person as crucial for deviant stigmatization. People who had various diseases, addictions,
and criminal behavior. These, third family or theories within the manifested a certain deviant behavior, had physical disabilities,
sociological paradigm are branched into several currents: the mental illnesses but also revolutionary ideas for solving the
theory of anomie, the theory of differential association, the biggest issues and challenges at the moment also appeared as a
theory of self-esteem, the theory of social pressure, and the target of stigmatization. It must also be noted that political
theory of labeling. The latter theory, or the theory of labeling rivalry emerges as a motive for socially stigmatizing and
seems special and different not only in terms of differences disavowing a political competitor - and such claims often end
within the sociological paradigm but also in terms of bio- with the revelation of a tendentious and false accusation that
anthropological and psychological theories, for the sole reason comes too late, the adversary has won the position or
that it insists on the mirror character of the formation of social prestigious service. To such individuals, the warning has been

IJSER
identity and hence the reaction. locates the middle of individual preserved to this day that care should be taken with them, and
behavior as the main initial trigger in the development of a if possible, they should be avoided. Individuals' mental illnesses
deviant cultural pattern of behavior. This theory is so developed are often seen as incurable diseases, while addictions and forms
today that it notes theoretical views that explain how groups of deviance are seen as genetically predisposed conditions that
and institutions with their stigma contribute to initiating and cannot be overcome or improved. After all, the stigmatization
strengthening the self-identity of the deviant and directly and avoidance of people who carry stigma as a common
contribute to the development of a deviant career. practice of today's speaks and the practice of institutions that
care for stigmatized people (most often hospitals and
2. DEFINING STIGMA sanatoriums for people with mental illness) are built on the
outskirts of cities and other settlements - far from the eyes of
The notion of stigma, or etiquette is quite old in social use and
others. Ironically, today, despite advances in medicine and the
is found in almost all known cultures and stages of
finding of drugs and therapies for mental illness and addiction,
development of human society. Etymologically, the word
the person is still perceived and stigmatized as a lunatic,
stigma has Greek (ancient) roots and usually meant a sign or
criminal, or addict after successful treatment and rehab. In fact,
stamp that was imprinted on slaves, criminals, traitors,
the real problem arises when this tendentious and stereotyped
ostracized (persecuted) and meant them in various qualities.
and prejudiced labeling penetrates deep into the victim's
The label, among other things, signified ownership attitude
consciousness and leads to a state of self-confidence that he
towards slaves but also incriminating status of criminals or
really deserves and reflects the stigma attached to him. The
persecuted. In the Middle Ages, under the influence of the
person begins to intensely notice and evaluate how he is
power of the Christian church, labels of witchcraft, heresy or
perceived by the environment, accepts the label and finally
delusion were imprinted on a certain type of women, eccentric
reconciled with that condition decides to live with that stigma.
men, but also on great number of scientists and politicians. That
Often the process of stigmatization is accompanied by real
the stigma had a huge impact not only on the perception of
avoidance, ridicule and discrimination that lead to alienation
others about the social reputation, work and general well-being
and self-isolation. This situation today is also subject to legal
of the labeled person, but also on the pure survival of the person
analysis, because it contains elements of violation of the
and his family, having in mind particularly the practice of the
fundamental rights and freedoms of the citizen.
Holy Inquisition of the Catholic Church which often without
any evidence mostly on personal accusations and slanders, sent
countless men and women to the stake. From this series of social
stigmatizations, we should not forget the yellow stripes of the

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 609
ISSN 2229-5518

3. HOWARD BAKER`S CONTRIBUTION TO ordinarily understood, jn which the causes of

CATEGORIZING THE THEORY OF LABELING IN THE deviance are located in the social situation of
ORDER OF SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGMS the deviant or in "social factors" ", which
prompt his action. I mean, rather, that
The theory of labeling is an important sociological theory that
Social groups create [Link] making the rules
began to develop intensively in the 60s of last century. It whose infraction. constitutes deviance, and by
provides answers to questions about human behavior, for applying those rules to particular_people and
example, why people behave in a certain way when society labeling them as outsiders. From this point of
rejects an individual, i.e., gives him a label. Becker first defines view, deviance is not a quality of the act the
the theory of labeling according to which he sees deviation as a person commits, but rather a consequence of
consequence of the process of interaction between social control the applicanon by others of rules and sanctions
and possible deviation and therefore it can be seen that the to an "offender." The deviant is one to whom
theory of labeling and deviation are closely related. Deviant are that label has successfully been applied;
those individuals whom society has marked as such because deviant behavior is behavior that people so
they have violated its norms. [1]. Becker believes that the first label. [3].
consequence of labeling a person is the consolidation of his
deviant status, which automatically becomes dominant. Thus,
the theory of labeling, with all that it encompasses and refers to, Labeling individuals as deviant creates favorable conditions for
is neither a theory nor focused solely on the act of marking as secondary deviation (which is the basis of the study of marking
some believe. On the contrary, it`s a way of looking at the theory). It is a deviation that individuals themselves accept in

IJSER
general area of human activity, it is a perspective from which, response to environmental reactions. Labels like madness and
previously obscure things will be clearer”[2]. Theory of labeling loss of reason are a kind of social control of mental illness. A
is considered an important approach in deviant research, person does not receive a label because he is ill, but at the
suggesting that people become deviant because political moment of entering a mental hospital, and after receiving a label
authorities and others name their behavior by assigning certain he often stays forever [4]. The point is that they are more often
labels. The problem of labeling was explored by another labeled as powerful in society, and individuals who are labeled
sociologist, Erwin Goffman, at about the same time as Baker. as deviant are often from poor and powerless groups. Thus,
However, his interest in stigma focuses on people with physical social control creates the mentally ill and socially responds to
and mental disabilities and shows how the stigma given to them them through the institutions in which it places them [1].
by the environment affects the formation of their problematic
social identity [3]. So, if a person is mentally ill, his status as a 4. ERWIN GOFFMAN: LABELING AS THE BASIS OF A
parent, friend, worker is automatically ignored ... All people DEFORMED SOCIAL IDENTITY
behave more or less abnormal and therefore there is a division
Goffman is best known in sociology as the most important
into deviant and "normal". Such phenomena are called primary
representative of the dramaturgical approach, and his
deviations. Therefore, the behavior is contrary to social norms,
sociological perspective is based on the belief that social life is a
but generally goes unnoticed by the action of social control.
series of dramatic performances, similar to those performed on
Both approaches by Howard Becker and Erwin Goffman's
theatrical stages. His contribution today in sociological theories
dramaturgical analysis belongs to the micro-sociological
is recognizable in the contemporary directions of symbolic
paradigm and explore society in the context of everyday small
interactionism, structuralism and ethnomethodology [5], i.e.,
group interactions and face-to-face relationships. According to
the sociological paradigm that society studies at the micro level
Becker, the theory of labeling belongs to the developmental
of relationships. The idea that the person is formed interactively
concepts, mainly focused on the social psychology of deviation
in contact with others, in which the space between the
and deals with assumptions for deviation at the level of
individual and others appears as his audience, is the basis of his
individual and small group.
most famous work, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life 1959
...This assumes that those who have broken a
[6]. As integral parts of his sphere of research interest, Goffman
rule constitute a' homogeneous category,
emphasizes the appropriate analogy of theater and introduces
because they have committed the same
deviant act. the terms: foreground, stage, personal plan, backstage, and
Such an assumption seems to me to ignore the impression management. The last notion of impression
central fact abour deviance: it is created by. management, as well as mystifications are actually techniques
society. I do not mean this in the way it is with which social actors play roles in their lives. Convinced that

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 610
ISSN 2229-5518

social relations are best explored at the micro level of higher social strata through career or professional
interaction, Goffman goes to great lengths to equate social actors advancement, then to the group of social deviants such as drug
with theatrical actors and extracts the essence of human life addicts, prostitutes, alcoholics, criminals should be added to the
from the intention of better representation to others in a good Roma, musicians, bohemians, jazzers, urban poverty [8]. (ibid.,
light. 156-7). From today's point of view, this view would certainly be
However, Goffman's other work, Stugma: Notes on the considered ethnocentric and chauvinistic, but the reality of
Management of Spoiled Identity 1963 [7]., is much more significant America in the 1960s, on which it bases its theoretical positions,
on the problem of social deviance. In this book, Goffman leads Goffman to implicitly offer prejudices and stereotypes as
explores the problem of labeling, the meaning of evaluation, a necessary tool for stigmatization and but also the granting of
and definition by others in the interaction process. Perhaps the social deviant status.
most significant contribution to Goffman's book stigmatizing Writing in his book and presenting personal testimonies of
theory is the classification of stigma. Namely, Goffman believes people with physical disabilities, Goffman also points out how
that there are three types of stigmas, i.e., three sources for the rejection and lack of feeling of others about such people
stigmatization. "The first is physical disfigurement - various contributes to the emergence of autostigmatization. But on the
deformities of the body. Then there is the weakness of character other hand, when it comes to deviance, he makes a sharp
which manifests itself as weak will, dominant or unnatural difference in terms of the well-being of some of the stigmatized
passions, dubious or rigid beliefs, dishonesty and finally, there deviant personalities and the stigmatized normal (non-deviant)
is tribal, national and religious stigma, which is a kind of stigma personalities who are in a very unenviable position. As an
that is transmitted from generation to generation and equally example, he cites people who are married to a bad person or
covers all family members [8]. In the last chapter of this small people with low incomes and large families. The contrast of

IJSER
but influential book on theory of labeling, Goffman specifically social perception and willingness to stigmatize in this case
addresses the relationship between stigma and deviance, and it shows that physical deficiencies (which are the main focus of his
is interesting to note that he clearly expresses his opposition to book) sometimes remain out of reach but the quality of life of
the term deviance, considering that the term deviant or such individuals is no better than that of stigmatized
deviance cannot be an umbrella that included every person with individuals.
behavior contrary to expectations. This is because there are too
many forms of deviation such as alcoholism, prostitution, drugs
and the like. and that most often people who are stigmatized as 5. CRITICS OF THE LABELING THEORY
deviant manifest different types of addiction and deviant
behavior. Very often these individuals have nothing in common labeling [Link] a important theory that can be used to explain
in the motives and manifestations of deviant behavior and the criminal behavior. Labeling theory is a theory that laid
social background is quite different. But it is much more emphasis on the social process through the special attention
significant that in the ranks of persons who manifest deviant devoted to the interaction between individuals and society. This
behavior, among others, Goffman includes the occultists and theory assumes that it is likely that every person can commit
insists on categorizing them as deviant. Further classifying criminal acts. Akers & Sellers [9] argued that labeling theory as
deviant individuals, he distinguishes social deviants from an explanation of criminal and deviant behavior is derived from
deviant groups. The first type is considered to be in fact the symbolic interactionism theory in sociology. Symbolic
individuals who most often belong to the lower social class in interaction is a theory that asserts that facts are based on and
whom the mark of their status is clearly recognizable through directed by symbols. The foundation of this theory is meanings.
the way of expression, appearance, behavior and who are Symbolic interaction according to Aksan, Kisac, Aydin and
considered second-class citizens, while the second type or Demirbuken [10] examines the meanings emerging from the
deviant groups are ethnic and racial minorities - individuals reciprocal interaction of individuals in social environment with
who have a common history and culture (often of national other individuals and focuses on the question of “which
origin) whose membership is passed down from generation to symbols and meanings.
generation, imply loyalty to the group and have a relatively The problem of morality seems to be part of all sociological
unenviable position in society [8]. From the above it can be research, but the interaction theory of deviation is particularly
noticed that the perception by others plays an important role in provocative in this type of research. Moral criticism comes from
creating self-awareness as a deviant person. If we add to this the political center and beyond; from the political left and from
Goffman's conviction that all those individuals who in one way the left current. Interactionist theories are accused of aiding and
or another are hindered by social mobility and advancement to abetting the enemy, when the enemy is considered to be those

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 611
ISSN 2229-5518

who disrupt the stability of the existing order or government deviation certainly exists even before the reaction occurs. Some
institutions. They are accused of openly endorsing conventional critics do not address the real logical problems that Becker has
norms, of refusing to support attitudes against government examined before, but rather argue that there is certainly a
institutions, and (of the present) of supporting attitudes against certain characteristic of activity that indicates deviation,
government institutions only seemingly temporarily more regardless of whose reaction it is. Usually the deviation is
inclined to maintain the status quo. located in cases of breach of contract rules ( [13] [14]).
Many critics (not necessarily conservative, though some are) Critics in this process were disturbed by the fact that the term
believe that interactionist theories of deviance publicly or "deviation" occurs more often in pairs with situations that are
covertly attack traditional morality, while consciously rejecting defined as deviant, regardless of whether the alleged activities
conventional definitions of what is and what is not deviant and occurred or not. In making this choice, analysts probably
questioning the assumptions underlying the actions of wanted to avoid agreeing to a restrictive division of the
conventional organizations. deal with the issue of deviance. potentially deviant situation. This is to avoid the consequences
Lemert, for example, says: of recognizing the essential situational character of the rule,
which exists only when the contract for one situation after
On the surface, the sociology of deviance another is renewed and does not constitute a permanent specific
offers a relatively independent or scientific embodiment of the core values [15].
approach to the study of certain types of In response to the criticism, Becker stressed that the real attack
social issues. Nevertheless, her manner, on the social order is the insistence that all parties involved be
attitude, and choice of subject matter reveal properly investigated. The former definition of the field of
a strong critical stance toward the ideology, deviation as the subject of research was focused on persons

IJSER
values, and methods emanating from state
accused of violating the rules of this order, except for observing
societal oversight agencies. In extreme
those who created those rules and implemented them. Being
statements, the theory of deviance is
excluded from arousal means that their claims, theories and
described as little more than the result of
statements are not subject to critical scrutiny. [16].
arbitrary, accidental and biased conclusions,
The fact that interactionists do not accept conventional theories
which should be understood as a
sociopsychological process in which groups leads to a critical attitude towards the affirmation of
of people seek to create conditions for conventional authority and morality and towards hostility to
permanent recognition of established values interactionist research by their advocates and advocates. For
and behaviors. There is also an impression these reasons, interactionist theories seem (and are) leftist.
that the purpose of describing and analyzing Intentionally or not, they erode conventional thinking patterns
the company's oversight agencies is to show and government institutions. However, the Left criticizes these
their failure in what they are trying to deal theories by supporting neither left nor right-wing views. Just as
with and to expose their incidental there are people who approve of the work of existing
encroachments on "inalienable rights" and institutions and do not like the way interactionist theories
"freedoms". Viewed in this way, the question their assumptions and legitimacy, there are those who
sociology of deviance is more a critique of see existing institutions as worthless with regret that
society than a science. Weak help and interactionist theories do not mention that worthlessness. . Both
support is the kind of decision-making and resent the ambiguity of the moral stance, attributing the
supervision that is really needed to maintain
problem of the unfortunate ideology to "value neutrality",
the unique feature of our society, the
which, pretending to be neutral, actually supports "radical" or
possibility of freedom of choice. [11].
"barely liberal" ideologies, as is the case. ([17]; [18]).
Interactionist theories of deviation are severely criticized when
Howard Becker himself responded to numerous criticisms a few
critics find that this complex picture of the relationship between
years after the publication of the initial version of the labeling
scientific research and ethical judgment is too subtle and
theory. He did so in the 1963 article Outsiders: Studies In The
insufficiently direct. Just as critics at the center resent the
Sociology Of Deviance. [12].One of the first things he did was
interactionist theory of incomprehensibly refusing to
reconsider the critique of "labeling theory" that criticism does
acknowledge that rape, robbery, and murder are truly deviant,
not distinguish explanation from the essence or nature of what
critics on the Left argue that it does not acknowledge that class
needs to be explained. If the critics think that the deviation is
oppression, racial discrimination, and imperialism are truly
only a matter of definition set by those who react to it, but at the
deviant or that they are deviant. . and injustice are real social
same time postulates the deviation to which they react, then the

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 612
ISSN 2229-5518

problems, yet they are already being denounced [17]. Both sides placed on the diversity of decision-making powers - how one
want to insert their biased ethical opinions into scientific papers group gains power and how it uses it to determine the extent to
in the form of unsupervised factual claims that rely on the direct which other groups will be valued, understood and treated.
use of ethical judgments around which there is a high degree of Elites, ruling classes, superiors, adults, men, whites - mostly
agreement. Thus, if I say that rape is really deviant or that members of superior social groups - maintain their power by
imperialism is a real social problem, I think that these equally controlling the way people define the world, its
phenomena have certain empirical features that, we will all components and capabilities, and by using more primitive
agree, make them worthy of condemnation. We can, according forms of control. They can use even more primitive means to
to our research, determine exactly that, but very often we are establish hegemony. But label-based control of markings and
required to accept them by definition. markings is easier to enforce and costs less, superior ones prefer
Determining that something is deviant or a social problem it. The attack on the hierarchy begins with an attack on
makes empirical representation unnecessary and protects us denunciations, labels and ingrained notions of who is who and
from discovering that our prejudices are incorrect (when the what is what.
world is not what we imagine it to be). Do we protect our own History is increasingly telling us that there are hidden ways of
ethical assessments from empirical scrutiny? control, based on determinations and labels directed at people.
keeping them shining in disappointments, we err in emotional We try to maintain control by blaming people for various
arguing. Scientists would often like to show that complex deviant behaviors. In the United States, political dissidents are
combinations of sociological theories, scientific evidence, and accused of using illegal drugs. Almost every modern country
ethical judgments are nothing more than a matter of definition. uses psychiatric diagnoses, institutions and staff to shut down
Scientists with strong value beliefs (whether political or moral) politically troubled types from Ezra Pound to Z. А. Medvedev

IJSER
seem to want just that. Why do people want to hide their morals [20] (Szasz, 1965). If we investigate how moral entrepreneurs
under the guise of science? Probably because, realizing or encourage the creation of rules and how they apply them in
intuitively feeling the current vain advantage that they do not certain cases, we will find out how governments of all kinds
have to admit that they are making "just a moral assessment", maintain their positions. In other words, we will discover new
they prefer to pretend that a scientific discovery has been made. forms of repression and ways in which repression becomes
All participants in any major social and moral controversy will "normal", "everyday" and legitimate.
try to gain this advantage and present their own morality as an Most interaction-type deviation research focuses on the direct
axiom so that it can become one of the assumptions of their participants in deviant dramas: the daily encounters between
theory, research and political dogma without discussion. The those involved in various forms of crime and vice and those
left, whose views I sympathize with, therefore proposes that it who apply the rules. We are more inclined to investigate police
directly and openly attacks injustice and oppression, instead of officers, hospital staff, prison guards, psychiatrists, etc.,
pretending that the judgment that such and similar forms of meaning the people who directly give the stigma than their
behavior are social evil may come from basic sociological superiors, where the idea of stigmatizing someone comes from.
principles or that it is justified only by empirical discoveries. (Exceptions: [21]; [22]; [23] Application of Deviation Theory to
Criticism of the left current. Some critics [19] argue that Protesting US Politics) .
interactionist theories of deviation are only ostensibly against But the main concern of lower-level authorities is neither
government institutions and actually support them, attacking exclusivity nor inevitability; the consequence of this concern is
lower-ranking officials in repressive institutions, leaving those to actually question the subordinates who are subject to control
in high positions responsible for oppression. untouched and, by higher authorities. They can order these activities openly or
most of all, blaming their disobedient subjects. metaphorically, so that, if necessary, they can be rejected, or
With the knowledge we have now, we can theoretically deal simply allowed to appear due to incompetence and oversight. If
with such issues. these activities are to be condemned, then several organs, in any
There is no corroborating evidence to support the criticism, nor case, share the blame. Even if he is not a trial general for the My
is there any evidence to refute it. This critique is directed at some Lai killings, these events have shaken people's faith in the moral
general moral subject of discussion of interactionist theories, as soundness of the military action in Vietnam and those in high
well as the factual problems associated with the consequences positions. Similarly, if we think that school psychologists work
of research and theorizing, and can therefore be challenged. for school administration and not for their patients [24], we lose
Interactionist theories of deviation, as well as interactionist all the trust we have in traditional psychiatric institutions. The
theories in general, deal with the way participants define speed with which official spokespersons at the highest levels are
themselves and their environment. Particular emphasis is able to refute corruption analysis (even at the lowest level),

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 613
ISSN 2229-5518

incompetence or injustice should show us, at least as clearly as balance and therefore its social value is irreplaceable, within
they do, the extent to which these analyzes attack institutions which society does not want to touch them [4] .
and their agents and superiors. .and subordinates. Such Sladjana Ivezic [25] in her article "The Stigma of Mental Illness"
research has a special moral impetus allowing us to examine the describes how society most often characterizes mentally ill
work of institutions in the light of their public goals and their people, ie with which prejudices it most often stigmatizes them.
own favorite descriptions of what they do. Therefore, our work According to her, the mentally ill are:
has a critical impact when it produces something that can be 1.) Dangerous (especially if treated in psychiatric institutions
interpreted as an assessment of social processes or any part of and diagnosed with schizophrenia)
them. 2.) Unable to live independently and make decisions
3.) Weak people (they are to blame for their illness because they
are not strong enough "character"; depression and anxiety
6. THE CONTEMPORARY CONDITION WITH THE disorders)
4.) Incurable (demented, retarded, schizophrenic and treated in
LABELING THEORY
social care institutions).
The field of scientific interest in the role of stigma in today's From a personal experience, it can be stated without a doubt
society is expanding to other areas such as medicine and that it is not only possible but also likely that a person can
especially psychiatry. An analysis of the sociological become what he or she is labeled. It can also be stated that this
contribution to the embodiment of the theory of labeling was theory applies more to children and those with low selfesteem
previously made through a brief review of the positions of the than anyone with a positive self-image hence it has been widely
most important sociologists Howard Baker and Irwin Goffman. utilized to explain juvenile delinquency. According to the

IJSER
It was found that a good part of their research focus was on labeling theory, a person is more apt to commit acts that go
people with physical disabilities. Recent studies in psychiatry, against what is socially acceptable if that person is labeled in
however, show how mental retardation contributes to such a way [26]. It is important to note that social labeling theory
stigmatization and auto stigmatization leading to withdrawal argues that deviants and criminals begin accepting or believing
and the beginning of a deviant life. People suffering from they are people who do bad things and therefore through
mental health spectrum disorders state several reasons why transformation begin to believe that they are bad people. In
they do not seek help. Experience of discrimination, contempt, summary, contemporary labeling theorists assume that during
misunderstanding, gossip, giving the epithet aggressive and real or imagined interactions, individuals project themselves
dangerous, humiliation. These are the most common problems into the role of significant other and make assessments or self –
faced by a mentally ill person, if he seeks help. The fact is that appraisals [27]. Further examination of the labeling perspective
more people are suffering from the effects of stigma, even more indicates that this assumption is guided by the view that
than the effects of mental illness. Similarly, social stigma takes humans have the ability to choose among competing labels for
many forms, from avoidance to ridicule. Support and their self-conceptions [27]; [28]. The current labeling theory of
understanding, for the mentally ill, often disappear when it crime deals with the results of labels, or strain on people
becomes apparent that the person will not recover. Thus, the (stigmas) and how it affects the development of criminal
chronically mentally ill are exposed to the greatest stigma. behavior. Theory of Labeling holds that society by placing labels
Stigmatization of mentally ill people is defined as negative on delinquents, criminals, stigmatizes them, therefore leading
labeling, marginalization and avoidance of people precisely to a negative label to develop into a negative self-image [29].
because they have a mental illness [25]. To become mentally ill
also means to experience social negation of values. The stigma
of mental illness also means fear of the mentally ill. A person is
usually not at all aware of this fear, it becomes apparent only
7. CONCLUSION
when the person meets a mentally ill person, when he is in The purpose of the interactionist approach in sociology is to
thought or reality, the person imagines everything that can clarify the phenomena under this heading in researching and
happen to him. A mentally ill person is anything that is not a explaining deviation, but also to explain to what extent moral
normal member of society. A firm definition of the normal is attitudes about them complicate our understanding. The
impossible without a precise definition of the abnormal. On the interactionist approach begins with the task of raising the
other hand, it is society that determines what is normal and awareness of sociologists by clarifying that their work should
what is pathological. The line between normal and pathological include research on deviance by raising awareness of the
is very thin. It is a pathologically important element of social importance of multiple facts and a wider range of people and

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 614
ISSN 2229-5518

events. All participants in these moral dramas, accusers and accusations and forms of deviation made by dignitaries and
defendants, should be studied, without the usual exceptions officials, considering them as a raw material for the analysis of
that may escape our professional research, regardless of the the social sciences, rather than as indisputable statements of
height of our social reputation or position. Carefully monitored, moral truth.
realistically presented activities that try to understand the The stigmatization of the mentally ill is also increasing. This
possibility of action of all involved. type of stigma is defined as negative labeling, marginalization
At the second level, according to Erwin Goffman's dramatic and avoidance of people precisely because they have a mental
analysis, the interactionist approach shows sociologists that illness. To become mentally ill also means to experience social
drama is the basis for exploring deviation, from all possible negation of values. The stigma of mental illness also means fear
perspectives, imposing deviations - situations, actions and of the mentally ill.
people - those powerful enough or high enough. of legitimacy Interactionist theories about the phenomenon of deviation
to be able to do so. A full understanding requires a thorough eventually become radical because the government views them
study of these definitions and the ways in which they are as such. When power, political or otherwise, has power because
developed and they become legitimate and taken for granted. it is partly astonishing and deceptive, science, which awakens
Goffman more closely explored the problem of labeling and the and speaks the truth, necessarily attacks the basis of that power.
importance of evaluation, labeling, and definition by others in Authorities are being attacked whose institutions and the
the interaction process. The most significant contribution to the judiciary are being subjected to interaction research because of
theory of stigmatization of this book by Goffman is the their "bias", their failed attempt to embrace traditional wisdom
classification of stigma. Goffman believes that there are three and values, and their destructive effect on public order.
types of stigmas, i.e., three sources of stigmatization. The first is These consequences of interactionist research complicate our

IJSER
physical disfigurement, the second is weakness of character and moral position as scholars by explaining events in moral arenas
tribal stigma, national and religious, which is a kind of stigma such as courts, hospital, school, and prison. They make it
that is transmitted from generation to generation and equally impossible for us to ignore the moral implications of our work
affects all members of the family. we are.
In the current circumstances, both of these levels of analysis This discussion of contemporary trends in the theory of
create a radical interactionist approach. Research by moral deviation is only the beginning of a consideration of the
entrepreneurs (as well as all those who want to control) and significance of morality in contemporary sociology. Further
interactionist analyzes disrupt the social hierarchy of credibility. progress is being made in addressing this complex potential
They call into question the monopoly of truth and the "whole problem with similar research within other areas of sociology
story" of those in positions of power and authority. They say such as the study of educational institutions, health care, the
that we should find out for ourselves the truth about the military, industry and business - that is, in all other areas where
indicated deviant phenomena, instead of relying on the official sociological research clarifies activities. of people and
and the verified reports that should be sufficient for every good institutions and thus influence our moral judgment of their
citizen. They create a relativistic attitude towards the performance.

REFERENCES

[1] Flegar, R. STIGMATIZACIJA PSIHIČKIH BOLESNIKA, Zagreb: [8] Gofman, I. Stigma: Zabeleške o ophodenju sa narušenim identitetom Novi
SVEUČILIŠTE U ZAGREBU - HRVATSKI STUDIJI.2018. Sad: Mediteran Publishing. 2009.
[2] Becker, H. Outsiders : Studies In The Sociology Of Deviance New York, [9] Akers, R. L., and Sellers, C. S. Criminology theories (5th ed.). NY:
The Free Press p. 177-212, 1991 Oxford University Press. 2009.
[3] Goffman, E.. Stigma: Notes on the management of a spoiled identity. [10] Aksan, N., Kisac, B., Aydin, M., & Demirbuken, S. Symbolic
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1963 interaction theory. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 902-904. 2009.
[4] Frančišković, T., Moro, LJ. i suradnici, Psihijatrija, Zagreb: Medicinska [11] Lemert, E. Human deviance, social problems and social control.
naklada 2011. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1967.
[5] Ritzer, G. Suvremena sociologijska teorija, Zagreb: Nakladni zavod [12] Becker, H. S. Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. New York:
Globus. 1997. Free Press. 1963.
[6] Goffman, E. Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. N.Y. Anchor, Garden [13] Gibbs, J. P. `Conceptions of Deviant Behavior: The Old and the
city, 1959. New`. Pacific Sociological Review, Volume: 9 issue: 1, page(s): 9-14.1966.
[7] Goffman, E. Stugma: notes on the Managment of Spoiled Identity. N. J. [14] Alvarez, R. Informal reactions to deviance in simulated work
Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs 1963. organizations: A laboratory experiment. American Sociological Review,
33(6), 895–912. 1968.

IJSER © 2021
[Link]
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 12, Issue 7, July-2021 615
ISSN 2229-5518

[15] Strauss, A. Schatzman, L. Ehrlich, D. Bucher, R. and Sabshin, M. [19] Gouldner, A. The sociologist as partisan: sociology and the welfare
“The hospital and its negotiated order.” Pp. 147-169 in E. Friedson (ed.), state. IN: American sociologist. 3(2) pp. 103-116. 1968.
The Hospital in Modern Society. New York: The Free Press. 1963. [20] Szasz, T. S. Psychiatric Justice. MD. New York: Macmillan Co., 1965.
[16] Becker, H. WHOSE SIDE ARE WE ON? Presidential address, [21] Messenger, J.C. Inis Beag – Isle of Ireland, New York: Holt, Rinehart
delivered at the annual meeting of the Society for the Study of Social and Winston. 1969.
Problems, Miami Beach, August, 1966. Social Problems, Vol. 14 N.3 p.239 – [22] Dalton, M. Men who manage. New York: Wiley.1959.
247. 1967 [23] Skolnick, J. The politics of protest. New York: Ballantime Books, 1969.
[17] Mankoff, M. Power in advanced capitalist society: A review essay [24] Szas, T. 1969
on recent elitist and marxist criticism of pluralist theory. Soc. Probl. 17: [25] Ivezić, S, `Stigma psihičke bolesti` Medix (64) 2006.
418–430. 1970. [26] Bernard, T. J., Vold, G. B., Snipes, J. B., & Gerould, A. L. Vold's
[18] Liazos, A. The Poverty of the Sociology of Deviance: Nuts, Sluts, theoretical criminology. New York: Oxford University Press. 2010.
and Preverts Social Problems, Volume 20, Issue 1, Summer 1972, Pages [27] Adams, M. S., Robertson, C. T., Gray-Ray, P., & Ray, M. C. Labeling
103–120, and delinquency. Adolescence, 38(149), 171–186. 2003.
[28] Mead, G.H. Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social
Behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1934.
[29] Cullen, F. T., & Agnew, R. Criminological theory: Past to present :
essential readings. New York: Oxford University Press. 2011.

IJSER

IJSER © 2021
[Link]