According to Carmichael (2014) social control involves the investigation of mechanisms via which individuals must ensure there is social order and coherence. It is a crucial component of a person’s socialized process (Carmichael, 2014). Social control suggests that members of all societies must follow some universal norms or rules. Its forms include formal and informal controls. Acting contrary to these norms could lead to a minimum level of punishment for maintaining social order (Chriss,2013). Social control alludes to the processes of regulation of a person or collective behavior within a society, which supports conformity and obedience.
The above description implies the influence of internal means of regulating, including an individual’s conscience, personality, and responsiveness concerning good and evil, are influential in mitigating the possibility that a person will deviate from social norms (McGivern & Little, 2013). This stands in contrast to external means of regulation where people conform because a sovereign figure threatens sanctions should the person break the set rules or regulations. The concept of social theory centers on how to discourage deviance. It can involve social or political mechanism (Lambert et al., 2011).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Each of these mechanisms determines and enforces a standard of conduct for each member of the society and consist of different properties, including shame, disapproval, persuasion, coercion, and others (Cooley, Moore, & Sample, 2017). Social control is practiced through a person and establishments, learning centers and within the work environment. Despite its origination, the purpose of social control is to ensure there is conformity to mainstream norms and guidelines (Lambert et al., 2011). Group members mainly use a social control in reaction to an individual it regards as deviant, problematic, with the objective of maintaining conformity.
Conformity involves similar attitudes, traditions, and behaviors to group norms. The tendency to conforms takes place in small groups and within communities as one, and could stem from indirect convinces or unsubtle and explicit social pressure (Chriss, 2013). Conformity may happen in the company of others, or when a person in unaccompanied. For instance, individuals prefer to respect social norms when choosing what to wear or viewing the favorite tv shows, despite whether others are present. By contrast, obedience includes social influence in which an individual follows orders from an authority figure.
Formal Social Control
Formal social control is exercised by authorized agents, such as law enforcement, employers, military personnel, and others. It is implemented as a last option at specific areas after the required behavior is not possible by unintended social control. The circumstance and severity in which formal control is carried out differ with nations (Cooley, Moore, & Sample, 2017). This is practiced through law as statutes, rules, and regulations to discourage or prevent the aberrant social behavior. A great example involves specific laws like criminalizing murder, which are designed for each member of society. Mining and fracking regulations could be directed at particular groups. Corporate laws are made for controlling the conduct of social organizations. The federal government and businesses practice formal control via law enforcement mechanisms. It could also be implemented through some formal sanctions such as penalties and incarceration (Lambert et al., 2011) The process of legal authority in a democratic society is established and planned through legislation by policymakers.
Aside from these more visible forms, formal control mechanisms also consist of the systematized propaganda by mass media, to bring about social control within communities. Lambert et al. (2011) comment that in large secondary groupings, informal controls are compromised owing to increasing anonymity, mobility, and disagreeing norms and values. Intimacy weakens, and members of the society are stripped of personal and emotional feelings towards each other. They mostly shift from place to another, or from one group to another.
Informal Social Control
Informal social control is implemented by a culture without affirming any laws or regulations. Informal social control is articulated through norms and practices. Casual agents exercise individual control without interference in an unsanctioned capacity (Foster, n.d.). Traditional societies associate causal social control beliefs with established social purchase. Informal social control includes mechanisms which are rooted in the formal rules but are performed by family, friends, and members of the society. Informal social control governs people’s behaviors in ways that they are rarely conscious of (Chriss, 2013). Because society comprises social beings, individuals behave in ways that minimize potential disapproval in interactions. A great example of informal social grouping includes family, friends, coworkers, and mass media. When the media reports that there is going to a devastating storm, individuals purchase enough food supplies to last through the storm and this is informal control (Little & McGivern, 2013). Feelings and personal loyalty connect members. In the family, a person is under the influence of his or her parents and other family members. On the contrary, the family is influenced by neighborhood or kinship groups.
By definition, it is easy for an individual to argue that social control exists like a set of parallel circles neighboring people and groups. Mackenzie (2002) states that the most vital features of this form of social control are that it is casual, impulsive, and unintended. For the most part, the group demonstrates its condemnation to the deviant members by ridicule, shame, and sarcasm. Because the group is solid, relations are robust, each member is personally known, and the person has a limited choice of a substitute group membership (McGivern & Little, 2013). This means it is difficult for the individual to overlook the disapproval of her groups and so has to meet her group expectations. Such techniques of control are effectual in primary groups in which ties are strong.
Conclusion
In summary, individuals have developed two forms of social control, including informal and formal. Formal authority involves written, enacted, and collated declarations in laws and regulations. Social networks and institutions formulate them. On the contrary, informal social control is authorized is one designed by an authority figure such as the government. Social control helps individual to avoid behaving in unusual ways. Besides, it encourages the person to act acceptably. Social control is not inherently a bad thing, without it people would not have the ability to survive. As human beings, we accept social control and comply with social norms to avoid deviance. One of the ways individuals prevent deviance is the fear of being subjected to social condemnation. Nobody desires to be disapproved, or be subjected to humiliations by others. Therefore, individuals tend to follow certain trends to fit in. Social control, both formal and informal assist in the regulation of society. Overall, social control cannot be avoided, it is part of the everyday life.
References
Carmichael, J. (2014). Social Control. Retrieved from http://sci- hub.tw/http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199756384/obo- 9780199756384-0048.xml;jsessionid=6E6DB7551868A59645877EFE9644658D
Chriss, J.J. (2013). Social Control: An Introduction . Cambridge: Polity.
Cooley, B. N., Moore, S. E., & Sample, L. L. (2017). The role of formal social control mechanisms in deterring sex offending as part of the desistance process. Criminal Justice Studies, 30(2), 136–157.
Foster, J. (n.d.). “Informal Social Control and Community Crime Prevention.” British Journal of Criminology , 35(4), 563-583. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-1-4899-2230-4%2F3%2F1.pdf
Lambert, E. G., Jaishankar, K., Jiang, S., Pasupuleti, S., & Bhimarasetty, J. V. (2011). “Correlates of Formal and Informal Social Control on Crime Prevention: An Exploratory Study among University Students, Andhra Pradesh, India.” Asian Journal of Criminology , 7(3), 239–250.
Mackenzie, D. L., & Li, S. D. (2002). “The Impact of Formal and Informal Social Controls on the Criminal Activities of Probationers.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 39(3), 243–276.
McGivern, R., & Little, W. (2013). Introduction to Sociology 1st (ed). Retrieved from http://solr.bccampus.ca:8001/bcc/file/debe8d05-dbdf-4cb8-80f9- 87b547ea621c/1/Introduction-to-Sociology-1st-Canadian-Edition-(Reduced).pdf
