Thomas Scheff

Sheff studied at the University of Arizona and in 1950 received a bachelor 's degree in physics from him. In 1960, he received a doctorate in sociology from the University of California at Berkeley ^[2] .

From 1959 to 1963, Scheff worked at the University of Wisconsin He then began working at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where, until now, he has been an honorary professor. In 1964-1965, Scheff was a research observer at the mental hospital in Shenli, where he was often present when psychiatrists communicated with patients, which allowed him to formulate a sociological theory of depression . Sheff published his most significant works on the development of the theory of stigma in the years 1960-1970 ^[2] .

In 1967, a collection compiled by Sheff entitled “Mental Illness and Social Processes” was published, which included the scientific works of famous and emerging sociologists and doctors who presented the outline of the theory of mental illness as a result of stigmatization ^[2] .

During the preparation of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Law , adopted in 1969, regulating involuntary hospitalization in psychiatry , Scheff served as adviser to the California Legislative Assembly ^[2] . Sheff was president of the Pacific Sociological Association ^{[2] [3]} in 1995-1996 ^[3] , co-chair of the section on the sociology of emotions of the American Sociological Association ^[4] .

Social control and the concept of "residual deviation"

As Scheff himself emphasized, he did not seek to refute the common psychiatric and psychological theories of mental illness, but sought to supplement them, noting that the refusal to incorporate social processes into the dynamics of mental disorders is one of the most frequent shortcomings of psychiatric theories and that the sociological approach allows opening new perspectives: understanding the phenomena of social control helps to better understand what constitutes such a phenomenon as deviation. In this regard, Scheff noted ^[2] :

If psychiatry wants to develop, it should consider not only the microworld of biology, but also a multitude of large-scale worlds, in particular, the worlds of emotions, relationships and social systems. People are not only bodies, but also emotional and interpersonal systems, and they are themselves included in social systems. To understand these systems, I suggest exploring more deeply the intrapersonal and interpersonal dialogue.

Scheff regards mental illness as a deviation that arises as a derivative of the social control system. In this regard, he argues: "... This system consists of a large-scale set of norms, on the one hand, and a number of standards-supporting sanctions, punishments and rewards, on the other." Norm Scheff defines as an expectation shared by members of a social group, and adherence to the norm is supported by a system of continuous monitoring and is a reaction to possible or imaginary sanctions. The system of social control, which determines the possibility of deviation, exists only being constantly supported by all or most members of society. The concepts within the framework of this system, as Scheff notes, are by no means absolute: there is no such thing as a crime in itself or a mental illness in itself - these are only concepts arising due to universal agreement, interpretation and reinterpretation ^[2] .

Sheff points out that not all deviations from regulatory expectations are perceived by society as a deviation: deviation is only the normative violation that all three answers receive from society: branding, segregation , stigmatization. The basis of segregation is a decline in social status (with the deviants falling into hospitals or prisons). Sheff characterizes stigmatization as the core of social reaction to deviation, and the main stigma mechanism as the transformation of intense emotional reaction and moral condemnation into stigma. Since the basis of social order is stable and predictable behavior, and predictability is the key to emotional calm for a member of a social group, deviating from accepted behavior leads to an intense emotional reaction ( excessive emotional response ): to such emotions as fear, fear, anger, confusion ^{[ 2]} .

Changing the prospect of research from medical to sociological when considering mental illness, Scheff refuses to use traditional medical terminology, because traditional medical terms predetermine a certain angle of problem consideration, and use sociological concepts instead: the concept of “breaking the rules” ( rule-breaking ) and "residual deviation" ( eng. residual-deviance ). In this case, the deviation is not characterized as a feature of the behavioral act itself, but as a feature of the reaction of other people to this behavioral act; in other words, deviation is the reaction of the social group to the behavior of the individual. According to Bernaysi Peskosolido and Jack Martin, “Sheff connects the central difference between the violation of rules and deviance with the difference between the violation of social norms and the aggregate that is considered and branded as a violation of norms” ^[2] .

The concept of mental illness Scheff relates to the concept of "residual deviation": according to Scheff, mental illness, unlike, for example, theft or murder, alcoholism or drug addiction , is a violation of "residual norms", that is, norms that the culture lacked and naming, which remained not articulated, although at the same time they retain their status of norms ^[2] :

Group culture for categorizing most of the violations of norms uses a certain glossary of terms: crime, perversion, drunkenness, bad manners - these are the most well-known examples. Each of these concepts indicates the type of the violated norm or, in extreme cases, the corresponding type of behavior. When these categories are exhausted, there is always the remainder of a multitude of various violations for which the culture has not given a definite name.

One of the examples given by Scheff is the norm adopted in modern society, according to which it is required “to look at the conversation in the interlocutor’s eyes”, and if a person looks at the conversation not in the eyes but on the forehead or ear, “we are not we simply think that a person is impolite, but that he lives in another world ” ^[2] .

Of particular importance is the theory of residual deviation to determine what constitutes schizophrenia - a diagnosis that, according to Sheff, is the most uncertain and does not have the usual equivalent, unlike depression , mania or obsession . It is schizophrenia that most signifies the normative boundaries of the society in which it arises and functions as a diagnosis. Differentiation of mental health and mental pathology and the emergence of a system of psychiatric diagnoses — such as, for example, hysteria , depression, etc. — led to the fact that many residual norms were called and were verbalized. But, according to Scheff, an unverbalable balance should always be preserved in culture — those norms that cannot be described, clearly stated in words — and this “remnant residue” associated with the foundations of the world view and the underlying social patterns of behavior lies at the heart of the concept of schizophrenia. As Scheff emphasizes, “the vagueness of the boundaries and the vagueness of the concept of schizophrenia indicate that it serves to indicate the remainder of the remnants” ^[2] .

Sheff notes that the sources of violation of social norms with residual deviation are very diverse: the causes of such a violation can be organic or psychological, may be the result of external pressure or an internal act of will. Very often, residual deviations are not noticed or interpreted as an expression of originality (normalization), and only in a much smaller number of cases are they recorded as a manifestation of a mental illness. Stereotypes of behavior, interpreted as a manifestation of a mental disorder, are laid in childhood, and most of the stereotypes of such behavior are borrowed not from adults, but from peers; In addition, these stereotypes are formed on the basis of images that come from children's fears. But only if the residual deviation caused a rather intense social reaction, this reaction leads to stigmatization and to the fact that a person becomes mentally ill ^[2] .

Stereotypes of insanity play the role of stabilizing public order and are constantly, albeit unintentionally, reinforced in social interaction; these ideas of madness are somehow integrated into the psychology of all members of society. Behavior based on residual deviation can lead to two types of social reaction: normalization (in most cases) or stigmatization. In the case of stigmatization, the environment forces the person to play the role of the mentally ill person expected from him, although he may not like it, and even encourages him for playing this role. Thus, the development of the mental illness is based on the modeling of the role of the mentally ill, and Scheff treats mental illness exclusively in a sociological way as a reaction to social influence, as a secondary deviation. The reason for modeling this role is that in a crisis situation (when a person violating residual norms is already subjected to stigmatization) both the deviant himself and his social environment feel a sense of shame, embarrassment and hopelessness due to the fact that human behavior cannot be defined in within this culture. The only way out in this situation for both parties is the role of the mentally ill. From the moment when a person begins to play this role, his actions begin to follow the stereotypes of madness. Attempts of a person to return to a normal role are punished, and for this reason there are no former mentally ill: this role is assigned to a person forever or at least permanently, constantly influencing his life in society ^[2] .

According to Scheff, the more the violator of social norms enters the role of the mentally ill, the more surrounding those who recognize him as mentally ill; but the more surrounding identify him with the role of the mentally ill, the more he enters this role, etc. Thus, the process of branding and stigmatization is described by Scheff as a vicious circle ^[2] .

Sociology of Emotions

As Scheff notes, in considering the problem of insanity, one cannot limit oneself to a socially-oriented approach: this approach would lead to a dead end without a supplementary psychological theory. Therefore, Scheff considers the problem of insanity also through the prism of the sociology of emotions (the sociology of emotions as a whole is a sphere of interest characteristic of Sheff: he developed this very topic throughout his life). Aware of the limitations of stigma theory, which is basically valuable only as an alternative to the medical view of mental illness, Sheff seeks to supplement it with a psychological approach and therefore introduces the psychological and sociological dichotomy of branding ( English labeling ) and rejection ( English denial ) ^[2] .

Rethinking the Freudian notion of a conflict between the desire of the child and parental prohibitions that is initial for the development of the personality, Sheff argues that the first situation that could provoke such a conflict is the cry and cry of a baby. Through their child expresses their feelings, informs their parents, and the further development of the personality depends on the parents' reaction to his cry and crying. If the parents perceive the child as a problem and materialize it, ignore its emotional experience, then crying is ignored and suppressed, the child is punished for his emotions. If the parents respond to the feelings of the child, trying to interact with him as a person with the person, they seek to find the cause of the emotional discomfort of the child and eliminate it. In the first case, the child becomes accustomed to suppress his emotions and later in life he displays emotional coldness, intolerance to the feelings of other people, and does not feel emotional closeness with other people ^[2] .

In an adult, acceptance or rejection, demonstrated by parents as a reaction to his infant crying, manifests as a reaction of pride or shame, and it is shame that is the key emotion that plays a role in the development of residual deviation. It is unrecognized shame that causes the development of what is later diagnosed as a mental illness; pride is a sign of intact social connections, and shame and a sense of shame are broken. Even in childhood, manifestations of pride and shame are disguised and ignored, and it can be problematic to recognize them in adulthood ^[2] .

According to Scheff, a peculiar chain reaction occurs with residual deviation: behavioral deviations cause a reaction of shame from others, and this shame provokes anger - in turn, reinforcing the reaction of shame and anger in the family system. Three stages are observed: a broken link; dysfunctional communication ; destructive conflict. Getting out of this circle, as noted by Scheff, is practically impossible for the rule breaker. Thanks to unconscious shame, the possibility of restoring broken social ties is blocked, and shame leads to the fact that when you try to restore them, even more alienation occurs ^[2] .

Conducting social studies of emotions in mental disorders on the basis of depression, Scheff notes that the root of depression lies in the lack of reliable social connections leading to a lack of feedback and alienation, which, in turn, leads to a certain emotional background in people suffering from depression. . According to Scheff, the main emotion of depression is not grief or anger, but shame, expressed in such characteristic manifestations of depression as a soft uncertain voice, lack of eye contact, anxiety , slowness, self-accusation. According to Scheff, depression develops in the direction from social integration to individualization, during which people gradually distance themselves from society ^[2] .

The theory of "residual deviation" Scheff caused numerous criticism and discussion, having received in the special literature, both positive and negative reviews. In particular, M. Clindard and R. Meyer in his work “The Sociology of Deviant Behavior” point out a number of advantages of this theory, emphasizing that Scheff offers a convincing interpretation of mental illness as a development of habitual role-playing activities, in which only the content of the role changes. According to the authors, “this perspective does not deny that people can show disorders, but only describes their social context” ^[2] .

Very significant is the discussion of Scheff with U. Gove, which lasted about 15 years and was reflected in a number of publications. According to Gove, only some empirical evidence supports the interpretation of mental illness as a social reaction, but they also put this theory in question. As Gove points out, hospitalized patients before hospitalization suffer from serious mental disorders, and if there are data showing the effect of stigma on the course of a mental disorder, then these data need clarification ^[2] .

Lori Reznek criticizes the theory of "residual deviation", noting that people recognized as mentally ill and hospitalized usually have mental disorders and before that, as a result of hospitalization and diagnosis, there is no deterioration in health, there are data on other causes of mental illness besides branding ( genetics , the influence of life circumstances), that if a mental illness - it's just acting out the role of the mentally ill, it is unclear why a person continues to play this role, even when it becomes incompatible with its social, intellectual and professional life, and that, contrary to the assertion Sheff that psychiatric symptoms are determined by social stereotypes, in fact symptoms of mental disorders are about the same, regardless of culture ^[2] .

The theory of depression Scheff, whose data were published in the journal "Psychiatry", received many responses and, despite its sociological orientation, was a significant addition to the clinical findings of psychiatrists. The authors of the responses, using data from their own clinical studies, confirmed and supplemented the findings of Scheff. In particular, the Israeli psychiatrist G. Shahar pointed out ^[2] :

Sheff's article, belonging to the growing wave of qualitative studies of depression, is important not only because it represents first-hand the “voice of depression”, but also because it establishes a link between studies of depression and the sociology of emotions.

Agreeing with Scheff’s statement about the significant connection between depression and shame, G. Holloway wrote ^[2] :

Shame and its consequences permeate our culture. Depression is one of the most common expressions of emotional distress and mental illness in our society. Therefore, it is natural that they should be connected.

Books

• Scheff, TJ (2011) What's Love Got to Do with It? The Emotional World of Pop Songs. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
• Scheff, TJ (2006) Goffman Unbound: A New Paradigm for Social Science. Paradigm Publishers.
• Kincaid, H., Phillips, B., Scheff, TJ (2002) Toward a sociological imagination: bridging fields. University Press of America.
• Scheff, TJ (1997) Emotions, The Social Bond, and Human Reality: Part / Whole Analysis. Cambridge University Press .
• Retzinger, SM, Scheff, TJ (1996). Bond International Perspectives on Restorative Justice. Crim. Justice Press.
• Scheff, TJ (1996) Crime, Shame, and Community: Mediation against Violence. Wellness Foundation / U. of California, Distinguished Lecture Series, Vol. Vi.
• Scheff, TJ (1994) Bloody Revenge: Emotion, Nationalism and War. Westview Press (Reissued by iUniverse 2000).
• Retzinger, SM, Scheff, TJ (1991) Emotion and Violence: Shame and Rage in Destructive Conflicts. Lexington Books. (Reissued in 2001 by iUniverse).
• Scheff, TJ (1990) Microsociology: Emotion, Discourse, and Social Structure. Univ. of Chicago Press.
• Scheff, TJ (1979) Catharsis in Healing, Ritual and Drama. University of California Press (Reissued by iUniverse 2001).
• Scheff, TJ (1975) Labeling Madness. Spectrum Books.
• Scheff, TJ (1967) Mental Illness and Social Processes. Harper and Row (edited collection of articles).
• Scheff, TJ (1966) Being Mentally III: A Sociological Theory. Aldine Press. New Editions, 1984, and 1989.

Selected Magazine Articles

• Scheff, TJ (2007) Hidden Emotions: Response to a War Memorial Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 13 (2), 1-9.
• Scheff, TJ (2001) songs and novels. Journal of Mundane Behavior 4.
• Scheff, TJ (2001) Social Components in Depression. Psychiatry. 64, No. 3, 212-224.
• Scheff, TJ (1997) A Vision of Sociology: 1996 PSA Presidential Address. Sociological Perspectives 40: 529-538.
• Scheff, TJ (1996) Academic Gangs. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 23, 157-162.
• Scheff, TJ (1988) Shame and Conformity: The Deference / Emotion System. American Sociological Review, June. 53, 395-406.
• Scheff, TJ (1974) The Labeling Theory of Mental Illness. American Sociological Review, 39, pp. 444-452.
• Scheff, TJ (1967) Toward a Sociological Model of Consensus. American Sociological Review, February, pp. 32-46.

• Hoffman, Irving
• Foucault, Michel
• Laing, Ronald David