5.12. Other Criminological Theories 
BRIAN FEDOREK 
Social Reaction Theories 
Initially a response to popular theories at the time, social reaction theories change the focus. Instead of 
focusing on the offender, social reaction theories concentrate on those people or institutions who label 
offenders, react to offenders, and want to control offenders. Grounded in symbolic interaction, social 
reaction theories emphasize how meanings are constructed. Words carry power and meaning. Thus, if 
someone is labeled as a criminal, it carries a connotation by other people. How will others view him or her 
with that label? How will society? People will act towards thing by the meanings attached. These meanings 
can be culturally created through interactions with peers. Perhaps it is why some of us like to wear certain 
name brand clothes or drive certain name brand vehicles. Those names have “meaning”; they can be cool, 
reliable, etc. They have status and meaning. 
Not everyone who commits a crime is caught. Additionally, not all those who are caught are labeled as 
a criminal. Why? Labeling theories sought to explain this phenomenon. In general, labeling theorists point 
to the social construction of crime, which varies over time and place. For instance, marijuana use is federally 
prohibited, but more and more states are legalizing recreational use. The same behavior can be legal in 
Oregon but illegal in New York. 
Furthermore, labeling theorists emphasize the process of being labeled and treated as a criminal; it can have 
deleterious effects. If a person is bombarded with a particular label, he or she may adopt that label. If a person 
was told over and over again that he or she was funny, that person might try to be funnier. What if a person 
were told over and over again he or she would amount to nothing? Perhaps, he or she would internalize that 
label and become nothing since others expect that. 
Braithwaite (1989) applied some of these ideas in his reintegrative shaming. Not all social reactions are 
ruthless; in fact, some of them are beneficial.  
1 Hence, it is the quality of social responses that is significant. 
We shame individuals to show disapproval. According to Braithwaite, shaming can be reintegrative or 
stigmatizing. Reintegrative shaming centers on forgiveness, love, and respect. Ideally, we want to reintegrate 
the person back into the community by removing the label. However, in some societies, like the United 
States, stigmatizing shaming reigns supreme. Stigmatizing shaming uses formal punishment, which degrades 
a person’s bond to his or her community. It is counter-productive and tends to shun the offender. For 
1. Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 
186