Describe the conceptions of deviance. Assess why theory is important to our understanding on deviance. Examine the basic difference between research questions for inductive versus deductive research in deviance.
In this regard, the chapter discusses the normative, relativist, and critical conceptions with which
researchers approach the study of deviance. Each of these perspectives can be both useful and
problematic.
The normative conception assumes that there is a general set of norms of behavior,
conduct, and conditions on which we can agree. There are three types of norms (rules of conduct
that guide human actions): folkways, everyday norms that do not generate much of an uproar if
they are violated, mores, moral norms that may generate more outrage if broken, and the law,
which is considered the strongest norm because it is backed by official sanction. Thus, depending
on the type of norm being violated, a perpetrator may be viewed as harmless and just weird, or as
a criminal who has broken the law.
The relativist conception assumes that the definition of deviance is constructed based
on the interactions of those in society. In other words, conditions or behaviors are not inherently
deviant, they become so when the term deviant is applied to them. Thus, the study of deviance
isnt about why certain individuals violate norms but, instead, about how these norms are
constructed. For relativists, deviance is defined as those behaviors that elicit a definition or label
of deviance.
Those working from a critical conception of deviance argue that the normative
understanding of deviance is established by those in power to maintain and enhance their power.
Instead of focusing on individual types of deviance, this conception critiques the social system
that exists and creates such norms in the first place.
