Labeling Theory and General Strain Theory in Criminology
This paper examines two influential sociological theories in criminology: Howard Becker's social labeling theory and Robert Agnew's General Strain Theory. It traces how Becker, writing in the 1960s, argued that society arbitrarily labels certain groups as deviant, causing members to internalize criminal identities. It then analyzes Agnew's 1990s revision of strain theory, which expanded the sources of strain beyond economic inequality to include personal loss and negative stimuli. The paper compares both frameworks, highlighting their shared emphasis on social forces over individual pathology, and considers their practical implications for crime prevention policy, including reducing stereotyping and building individual coping mechanisms.
- Introduction: Sociology and Criminal Justice: Sociological shift away from biological crime theories
- Howard Becker's Social Labeling Theory: Society labels groups deviant, shaping criminal identity
- Rules, Power, and Moral Entrepreneurs: Rules serve dominant groups via moral crusaders
- Labeling in Practice: White Collar Crime and Drug Sentencing: Sentencing disparities illustrate labeling theory's real-world effects
- Robert Agnew's General Strain Theory: Strain theory revised to include internal and external pressures
- Types of Strain and Their Effects: Three strain types and their links to criminal behavior
- Comparing Becker and Agnew: Implications for Crime Prevention: Both theories inform anti-crime policy and coping strategies
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper sets up a clear comparative framework early, introducing both theorists as examples of a broader sociological shift away from biological and moral explanations of crime.
- It grounds abstract theory in concrete, recognizable examples — crack versus powder cocaine sentencing and white-collar crime penalties — that make the arguments immediately accessible.
- The conclusion ties both theories to practical policy implications, demonstrating that understanding the theoretical differences has real-world relevance.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective comparative analysis: rather than treating each theory in isolation, it explicitly identifies where Becker and Agnew agree (social forces shape crime) and where they diverge (structural labeling versus internalized perception of strain). This contrast is used to draw out the distinct policy implications of each framework, showing that theoretical differences carry practical consequences.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief survey of the sociological turn in criminology, then devotes roughly equal space to each theorist — covering Becker's labeling theory, his concept of moral entrepreneurs, and illustrative examples before turning to Agnew's General Strain Theory and its typology of strain sources. A final comparative section synthesizes both frameworks and addresses crime prevention. The structure is straightforward and logically sequenced.
Introduction: Sociology and Criminal Justice
The field of sociology has been extremely influential in shaping our concept of criminal justice in the 20th century. Rather than focusing on biological or moral theories of why people commit crimes, criminology has begun to place greater emphasis on how social pressures may shape an individual's decision to engage in — or refrain from — criminal behavior. Two of the most prominent theories exemplifying this shift are Howard Becker's social labeling theory and Robert Agnew's General Strain Theory.
Howard Becker's Social Labeling Theory
Howard Becker's social labeling theory first rose to prominence during the 1960s. Becker suggested that criminals were not essentially different from other persons in the sense that they were more "wicked" or pathological. Rather, society labels certain persons — because of race, sexuality, poverty, or other behaviors — as different. Rather arbitrarily, certain persons are deemed members of potentially "criminal elements." Alienated from mainstream society for various reasons, members of these groups come to see themselves as different and therefore internalize the sense that they are rule-breakers.
In his book Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance, "Becker (1963) uses the term 'outsider' to describe a labeled rule-breaker or deviant that accepts the label attached to them and views themselves as different from 'mainstream' society" (Howard Becker's labeling theory, 2013). Certain groups may be seen as inherently deviant — such as young African-American males, the poor, or even simply juveniles who perform poorly in school. Eventually, members of labeled groups may begin to engage in deviant actions because they are denied the positive social reinforcements available to those in mainstream society. They may come to embrace the deviant label as a source of identity.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.