Stanley Cohen – Visions of Social Control (1985)

Visions of Social ControlSocial control refers to the mechanisms, strategies, and processes societies use to regulate individual behavior and maintain social order.: Crime, Punishment and Classification (1985) by Stanley Cohen provides a profound analysis of the transformations in social control in the late 20th century. While his earlier work, Folk DevilsSocially constructed groups labeled as threats to societal values, often exaggerated in moral panics. and Moral Panics (1972), focused on media discourses and moral reactions to deviance, Visions of Social Control turns to institutional, political, and administrative governance of deviance. The text is considered one of the most influential reflections on the modernization and diversification of criminal justice and psychosocial control systems.

Social and Academic Context

Cohen wrote at a time when Western societies were increasingly shaped by neoliberal reforms. PrisonA prison is a secure institution where individuals are confined by the state as a form of punishment, pretrial detention, or social control. systems expanded, welfare services were rolled back, and criminal justice policies began to incorporate more “community-based” alternatives. Against this backdrop, Cohen analyzed how control strategies were shifting—without necessarily becoming more humane or liberal.

Key Points

Stanley Cohen – Visions of Social Control

Main Author: Stanley Cohen (1942–2013)

First Published: 1985

Country: United Kingdom

Core Idea: Social control is undergoing transformation – new techniques, new institutions, new forms of surveillance and normalization

Theoretical Links: Foucault (PowerThe capacity to influence others and shape outcomes, even against resistance./Knowledge), Wacquant (NeoliberalismA political and economic ideology that emphasizes free markets, deregulation, and limited government intervention in the economy.), Garland (CultureThe shared symbols, beliefs, values, and practices of a group or society. of Control)

Key Concepts and Arguments

• Net Widening: Cohen describes the paradoxical effect of many “alternative” sanctions. Rather than replacing imprisonment or repressive measures, they often supplement them—expanding the control apparatus to previously unsupervised groups. Community service, probation conditions, or therapy programs result in a quantitative and qualitative expansion of social control. The metaphor of a “widening net” illustrates how more people are captured and normalized—without necessarily reducing overall repression.
• Medicalization vs. CriminalizationThe process of defining and enforcing behaviors as criminal.: Cohen explores the shifting boundaries between social sectors of control. DevianceDeviance refers to behaviors, beliefs, or characteristics that violate social norms and provoke negative social reactions. is increasingly psychologized or psychiatrized: Where individuals were once seen as criminals, they are now seen as patients. This doesn’t automatically lead to decriminalization but to a transfer into the domain of therapeutic control. The line between care and coercion becomes blurred, particularly when interventions are enforced against the will of those affected—anticipating Foucault’s critique of clinical power.
• Normalization: The goal of modern control is not merely the punishment of past behavior but the preventive modification of conduct and lifestyles. Institutions such as schools, social services, or probation offices act to normalize attitudes, routines, and self-images. Cohen refers to a “pedagogical and therapeutic approach” aimed at behavioral modification and social conformity. The focus shifts from the act to the actor—and ultimately to their entire way of life.
• Control without Walls: This concept summarizes the externalization of institutional control. SurveillanceSystematic monitoring of people’s activities, behaviors, or communications. and discipline increasingly take place outside traditional institutions like prisons—via electronic tagging, reporting requirements, or social training programs. This “control without walls” may appear more liberal but often amounts to a technologically intensified, everyday form of surveillance. The power dynamic remains intact but becomes spatially, temporally, and functionally more flexible.

Control Visions and Core Concepts

Cohen presents a twofold analytical model of social control: He defines key terms that describe structural transformations and new technologies of control, and he outlines four ideal-typical “visions of control,” representing distinct normative and institutional approaches to deviance.

Four Ideal-Typical Control Visions

• Repressive Vision: Classical logic of punishment – control through police, judiciary, and incarceration. Focuses on retribution, deterrence, and removal from society.
• Medical Vision: Deviance as illness – replaced by diagnosis, treatment, and therapy.
• Welfare Vision: Deviance as the result of social inequality – tackled through pedagogical and social support.
• Bureaucratic Vision: Deviance processed through technical rationality – dominated by classification, documentation, and administrative control.

Link to the Core Concepts

The previously discussed concepts—Net Widening, Medicalization vs. Criminalization, Normalization, and Control without Walls—are not separate control visions but describe transformations within and across the ideal types:

• Net Widening highlights how alternative sanctions (e.g., community service or electronic monitoring) do not replace punitive practices but add new control layers—usually combining elements of the Welfare and Bureaucratic Visions.
• Medicalization vs. Criminalization describes institutional shifts between punitive and medical domains—i.e., between Repressive and Medical Visions.
• Normalization is central to the Welfare and Bureaucratic Visions, aiming to align individuals with “normal” behavior through social work, therapy, or administrative procedures.
• Control without Walls illustrates the erosion of traditional institutions (like prisons) in favor of decentralized control technologies—often at the intersection of Bureaucratic and Repressive Visions.

Example: Electronic Monitoring

Electronic tagging is a prime example of “control without walls.” Although intended as a less severe alternative to incarceration, it often extends the duration and scope of supervision. What appears as a humane reform can, in Cohen’s sense, also represent a strategy for cost-efficient, expanded control.

Connection to Community Policing

Cohen’s notion of “control without walls” also resonates with more recent policing concepts such as Community PolicingA policing strategy that emphasizes collaboration between police and communities to identify and solve problems.. While Visions of Social Control focuses on the decentralization and diffusion of control boundaries, community policing aims at stronger integration of police, social services, civil society, and local networks.

Both developments indicate a paradigm shift in governing deviance: away from isolated, repressive punishment toward a mesh of control, prevention, and everyday regulation. Cohen warns, however, against celebrating these shifts as inherently more humane. There is a real risk that control is merely rebranded and further embedded in social life through informal cooperation (e.g., neighborhood networks or local councils).

In this regard, Cohen aligns with Foucault’s concept of governmentality: a form of power that operates not through overt repression but via self-regulation, normalization, and preventive governance. Similarly, Loïc Wacquant’s analysis of the neoliberal penal state emphasizes the transfer of security tasks to local actors and the rise of seemingly softer but ultimately effective disciplinary mechanisms.

Visions of Social Control thus allows us to understand seemingly progressive strategies like community policing not just as reforms, but as part of a broader shift in modern control techniques—ambivalent between inclusion and discipline.

Criticism and Reception

Visions of Social Control has been praised for its differentiated typology and critical stance toward allegedly “more humane” forms of control. Some critics pointed to its pessimistic tone and lack of empirical data. Nonetheless, the book is considered foundational for critical criminology and offers valuable tools for analyzing social control regimes in welfare states, prisons, schools, and social services.

Many of the control mechanisms Cohen analyzed—such as electronic surveillance, social work conditions, or networked local security practices—remain central to contemporary penal policy. His typology helps frame these developments not as isolated changes, but as symptoms of a broader transformation in the relationship between state, society, and deviance management.

References

• Cohen, S. (1985). Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification. Cambridge: Polity Press. [Full text available here]
• Cohen, S. (1972). Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers. London: MacGibbon & Kee.
• Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard. [Engl. Discipline and Punish]
• Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Durham/London: Duke University Press.
• Matthews, R. (2005). The Myth of Punitiveness. Theoretical Criminology, 9(2), 175–201.
• Loader, I. & Sparks, R. (2010). What is to be done about Public Criminology? Criminology and Public Policy, 9(4), 771–781.