Skip to main content
Log in

Trial-type ceremonies and defendant behavior

“Moralizing” and “cooling in” in an eviction setting

  • Articles
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

This study uses hearing transcripts to examine judge-defendant interaction in a trial-type setting. The setting is a public housing eviction hearing; judges are eviction board members and defendants are tenants facing eviction for non-payment of rent. All tenants in the sample were formally evicted, but in each case the execution of the eviction order was stayed on the condition that the tenant pay his rent. Two forms of verbal interaction are identified. The first, “moralizing” is deemed present when one or more board members directs a degrading remark toward the tenant. The second, “cooling in” is deemed present when one or more board members directs a helping remark toward the tenant and the tenant in some way indicates his receptivity. When moralizing occurs the eviction hearing contains all of Garfinkel's (1956) requisites for successful status degradation ceremonies. Consequently it was hypothesized that tenants who had been moralized would be less successful in clearing their rent debts than tenants who had not been moralized, but if successful, more likely get into rent payment trouble again. It was also hypothesized that tenants who had been “cooled in” would be more likely to clear their rent debt than tenants who had not been cooled and that, having cleared their rent debt, they would be less likely to recidivate. All predictions except the hypothesized association between cooling in and recidivism are supported by the data. Although cell sizes grow uncomfortably small, the predicted relations persist after controlling for obvious sources of spuriousness. The conclusion discusses the analogy between the housing eviction hearing and the criminal trial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Becker, H. S.Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance, New York: Free Press, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, O. D. A sociometric index for all occupations. In Reiss, A. J., Hatt, P. K., & North, C. C. (Eds).Occupations and Social, Status New York: Free Press, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M.Judging Delinquents Chicago: Aldine, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. Conditions of successful degradation ceremonies.American Journal of Sociology, 1956,16, 420–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. On cooling the mark out.Psychiatry, 1952,15, 451–463.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberger, A. S.Econometric Theory. New York: Wiley, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinch, J. W. A formalized theory of the self-concept.American Journal of Sociology, 1963,68, 481–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemert, E. M.Human Deviance, Social Problems and Social Control. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemert, E. M.Social Pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lempert, R. O. Evictions from public housing: A sociological inquiry. Unpublished doctoral disseration, University of Michigan, 1971.

  • McPartland, T. S., Cummings, J. H. & Garretson, W. S. Self-conception and word behavior in two psychiatric hospitals.Sociometry, 1961,24, 111–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G. H.,Mind, Self and Society, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mileski, M. Courtroom encounters: An observation study of a lower criminal court.Law and Society Review, 1971,5, 473–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R. & Skolnick, J. Two studies of legal stigma.Social Problems, 1962,10, 133–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Videbeck, R. Self-conception and the reaction of others.Sociometry, 1960,23, 351–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, M., Roberts, L. & Sobieszak, B. I. Accepting “significant others”: Six models.American Journal of Sociology, 1972,78, 576–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S., Bonacich, E., Cramer, M. R., & Zola, I. S. Agents of delinquency control: A comparative analysis. In Wheeler, S. (Ed).Controlling Delinquents. New York: Wiley, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I would like to thank Bliss Cartwright, Theodore Newcomb, Albert J. Reiss, Jr., and Stanton Wheeler for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. Work on this article was supported by Cook Funds of the University of Michigan Law School. In writing an earlier version I benefited from a Russell Sage Foundation residency in law and social science at the Yale Law School.

About this article

Cite this article

Lempert, R.O. Trial-type ceremonies and defendant behavior. Law Hum Behav 1, 343–362 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048594

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048594

Keywords

Navigation