He contemplates on whether one should side with the "underdog" or simply judge criminal behaviour as inherently wrong? He stresses the sociological difficulty of this decision. He claims that the researcher, "whether taking either side, will be accused of taking a one-sided and distorted view, but how is it possible to see the situation from both sides simultaneously" (Becker, 1963)? Despite many contributions, the evaluation of labelling theorists is normally considered with an excessive amount of criticism.CONTRIBUTIONIn attempting to evaluate the contribution of the labelling theorists to the study of the sociology of deviance, it depends on how the theory is viewed. If labelling theory is actually considered to be a theory, its flaws are many. However, if we attempt to consider the theory as a mere way of looking at deviance (as it was intended according to Becker), the contributions are many, as they opened up a whole new study of the individual after he or she has committed an act of deviance. It is also important to know that, labelling theorists do not merely consider the after-effects of the deviant act, as it is sometimes suggested. For example, in one of Becker's studies, he considers the individual and how he began to smoke marijuana. Furthermore, labelling theory along with the labelling theorists, will continue in their usefulness as long as deviant behaviour exists.CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, labelling theory has now spread outside the confines of the sociology of deviance. For example, the imputation of the label `insane` to a person may represent an important stage in the process of becoming mentally ill. Labelling theory has also been used to explain witchcraft. Nevertheless, the theory in its entirety has provided a beneficial development of the sociological understanding of self-conceptions, relationships between deviance, social reaction and social control. Furthermore, after thorough analysis it is evident...
