The Term Secondary Deviance Can Be Defined As?

The answer

Secondary deviance is deviance that occurs as a reaction to being labeled. Sociologist Edwin Lemert distinguished it from primary deviance — the initial rule-breaking that almost everyone commits at some point and that has little effect on self-identity. Deviance becomes secondary when society reacts to the act, publicly labels the person ("delinquent," "addict," "criminal"), and the person internalizes that label, reorganizing their self-concept and future behavior around it. The person begins to act in accordance with the label because it has become part of who they believe they are. So the correct definition names three linked elements: a public label, its absorption into self-concept, and the continued or amplified deviance that follows.

The labeling cycle: primary to secondary

Lemert's insight was that the societal reaction, not the original act, is what makes deviance stick. The cycle runs like this:

1. Primary deviance — a person breaks a rule (skips school, shoplifts once). They still see themselves as fundamentally conventional.
2. Societal reaction — others notice, react, and attach a label. The label can become a master status: the single trait through which society now sees the whole person, overshadowing every other identity they hold.
3. Internalization — repeated labeling and exclusion lead the person to accept the label as part of their identity.
4. Secondary deviance — the person acts on the internalized identity, and the deviance deepens, often reinforced by lost legitimate opportunities (a criminal record blocks a job, so illegal income continues).

This is essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy: predicting and treating someone as deviant helps produce the very behavior predicted.

A concrete example

A teenager is caught with marijuana once (primary deviance). The school suspends him, police record it, teachers and peers start treating him as "a troublemaker" (societal reaction and labeling). He is placed with other labeled students, denied opportunities, and eventually comes to see himself as an outsider who "doesn't fit" conventional life (internalization). He then adopts the identity fully — associating with a deviant subculture and repeatedly offending (secondary deviance). The second wave of deviance was manufactured by the reaction to the first.

Why the other options are wrong

On multiple-choice versions of this item, the distractors typically are:

• "The first act of rule-breaking a person commits." Wrong — that is primary deviance, which does not yet affect self-identity.
• "Any behavior that violates a serious criminal law." Wrong — this confuses secondary deviance with the seriousness of the act, but Lemert's concept is about labeling and identity, not the crime's magnitude.
• "Deviance that goes unnoticed by society." Wrong — secondary deviance requires the opposite: a public reaction and label. Unnoticed rule-breaking stays primary.

The key exam trap is choosing the "first act" option. Remember: primary comes first and is identity-neutral; secondary comes after the label and reshapes identity.