Social Control: Formal and Informal
What Is Social Control?
Social control refers to the range of ways in which societies regulate behaviour and encourage conformity. Without social control, functionalist sociologists argue, social order would break down — the shared norms and values holding society together would lose their binding force. Sociologists identify two broad categories of social control: formal social control and informal social control.
The distinction matters for sociology because different perspectives disagree sharply about whose norms are enforced, who benefits from social control, and whether the mechanisms of control operate fairly across different social groups.
Formal Social Control: The Criminal Justice System
Formal social control is exercised by agencies of formal social control — primarily the police, the courts and the prison system. These agencies are authorised by the state to use legal power to enforce rules and impose formal sanctions on those who break the law.
The police act as the front line of formal control, with powers of stop and search, arrest and detention. However, sociologists note that policing is not neutral: the decision to stop, question or arrest a suspect involves discretion, and research suggests this discretion can be applied unequally. Courts determine guilt and impose sentences. Prisons serve multiple stated purposes: punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation. Critics argue that the prison population disproportionately represents people from disadvantaged social backgrounds.
Functionalist view: The criminal justice system performs a necessary social function. By identifying, prosecuting and punishing offenders, it reinforces the collective moral boundaries of society (Durkheim’s boundary maintenance function). Without formal control, social order would collapse and the police and courts are seen as broadly serving society’s shared interests.
Marxist view: Marxist sociologists argue that formal social control primarily serves the interests of the bourgeoisie. The police and courts direct their attention disproportionately at working-class crime (street theft, disorder, benefit fraud) while largely ignoring or under-penalising the harmful acts of the powerful (corporate crime, tax avoidance, financial fraud).
Interactionist view: Formal control involves discretion at every stage — police officers decide who to stop; prosecutors decide who to charge; judges and juries assess credibility. Becker’s labelling theory shows that these discretionary decisions are shaped by stereotypes and social power, not just by the evidence of rule-breaking. The result is selective enforcement that amplifies existing inequalities.
Informal Social Control: Agencies and Mechanisms
Informal social control operates through the everyday expectations, pressures and reactions of social groups rather than through legal authority. Its agencies include the family, the peer group, education, religion, the media and the workplace. Informal control works primarily through informal sanctions: praise, approval and inclusion on one hand; ridicule, disapproval and social exclusion on the other.
The family: The family is typically the first agency of socialisation and informal control. Parents establish rules, reward conformity and sanction deviance long before formal institutions intervene. Feminist sociologists note that family-based informal control operates differently for boys and girls: daughters are typically given less freedom of movement, face earlier curfews and are held to different standards of behaviour.
The peer group: As young people grow older, the peer group becomes an increasingly important source of informal control. Peer approval and rejection are powerful motivators: individuals conform to group norms (dress, speech, attitudes, behaviour) to maintain belonging and social status. Subcultural theorists like Cohen argued that peer groups can also exert control in the direction of deviance, where group norms celebrate norm-breaking.
Education: Schools exercise informal control through teacher expectations, praise and punishment, the hidden curriculum (embedding norms of punctuality, obedience and effort) and through peer dynamics. The formal rules of schools overlap with informal peer pressure to shape student behaviour.
Religion: Religious institutions and belief systems promote moral codes and community expectations. Fear of social exclusion from a religious community, or internalised religious values, can serve as powerful informal controls. The specification specifically names religion as a distinct agency of informal social control alongside the family and media.
The media: The media exerts informal control by setting agendas, shaping public norms and rewarding or stigmatising certain behaviours. Media coverage of crime, in particular, can contribute to moral panics that heighten public anxiety and informal social pressure. Advertising and popular culture promote norms of consumption, gender behaviour and lifestyle that function as informal expectations.
Sanctions: Positive and Negative
Both formal and informal control operate through sanctions. Positive sanctions reward conformity to norms: a pay rise for hard work, social praise for kindness, applause for an achievement. Negative sanctions punish norm violation: a prison sentence for criminal behaviour (formal), or social ridicule and exclusion for breaking informal norms. Sanctions signal to individuals — and to wider society — where the boundaries of acceptable behaviour lie.
Formal control uses legal authority (police, courts, prisons) backed by state-imposed sanctions. Informal control uses social pressure and norms (family, peers, media, religion, education) operating through everyday interaction. Both types can be analysed from functionalist, Marxist, feminist and interactionist perspectives — each asking different questions about who controls, who benefits and who is most controlled.
Perspectives on Social Control: A Conflict vs Consensus Debate
The question of whether social control benefits society as a whole (the consensus view) or primarily serves the powerful (the conflict view) runs through the entire topic. Functionalists (consensus) argue that both formal and informal control are necessary to maintain the value consensus on which social order depends. Marxists (conflict) argue that both primarily serve bourgeois interests. Feminist perspectives argue that control operates differently by gender, with women subject to more intensive informal control than men — a point explored in the next lesson. Interactionists focus on how labelling and discretion shape the unequal application of control at the micro level of social interaction.
The five main agencies of informal social control are: the family, the peer group, education, religion and the media. Marxist and feminist perspectives both challenge the functionalist view that these agencies work neutrally in the interests of all society members.