Positive and negative deviance: More fuel for a controversy∗

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
While it is quite clear that there IS a theoretical and empirical accumulation of knowledge in the area of the sociological study of deviance which supports the viability of the notion of “positive deviance,” it also seems that the overwhelming majority of sociologists of deviance reject this possible paradigmatic shift. Hence, the voices “pushing” this shift are generally quiet, typically hesitant and the debate is made on the margins of the acceptable in deviance research. What we may be witnessing here is an attempt to introduce a change into the boundaries of a specific scientific paradigm (to the extent that such a paradigm indeed exists), and the typical reaction in the form of “resistance to innovation.” Once accepted, it is quite clear that sociologists of deviance, as well as others, will have to think in different terms, to develop different research strategies and to acquire new skills ‐ methodological and analytical. In this respect, the position of sociologists of deviance is better than that of criminologists because the latter really work with those acts that were defined by society as negatives ("crimes"). Sociologists of deviance are not limited by this self imposed barricade, hence, they can broaden their view and break new grounds. Grappling with the concept of “positive deviance” is one possible and exciting route.