Social Control

Social control refers to the mechanisms—both formal and informal—through which societies regulate individual and group behaviour in order to maintain social order, adherence to norms, and stable patterns of interaction. As a foundational concept in sociology and related disciplines, it encompasses the ways in which values, rules, and institutions shape conduct and ensure conformity. Scholars in anthropology, criminology, law, political science, and sociology view social control as essential to preventing anomie or lawlessness and to sustaining the cohesion of social systems.
Although the term has taken on a variety of meanings across historical periods, its central purpose remains the explanation of how societies secure normative alignment among members. Social control operates both internally, through the internalisation of norms and values, and externally, through sanctions and regulatory structures imposed by formal authorities.

Historical Development of the Concept

The concept of social control developed in parallel with the evolution of complex civilisations. In early tribal societies, customary practices governed behaviour, acting as informal constraints on conduct. As societies grew larger and more intricate, formal mechanisms emerged to reinforce expected norms and protect social groups from harmful actions. Evidence of formal control is found as early as sixth-century BC Athens, where criminal prosecutions were used to manage conflict and limit malicious behaviour.
Religion historically functioned as a powerful informal force, offering a moral framework that shaped communities and individual actions. Early thinkers in political philosophy also addressed the issue. Thomas Hobbes, in Leviathan, described how sovereign authority maintains order through lawful power. Cesare Beccaria argued that rational individuals respond to the severity and certainty of punishment, positioning penal systems as tools of social regulation.
Sociological engagement with the concept intensified with the rise of modern social theory. Émile Durkheim explored the paradox of deviance, suggesting that social control exists precisely because individuals must be regulated to preserve collective order. The term social control entered sociological vocabulary in 1894 through the work of Albion Woodbury Small and George Edgar Vincent. Initially used to describe society’s general regulatory capacity, the term evolved during the 1930s to denote processes through which individuals are brought into conformity with social expectations.
Twentieth-century scholarship expanded the field significantly. Many researchers identified religion as a key regulatory mechanism. In the late twentieth century the rise of individualism inspired new interest in therapy, psychology, and related practices as potential instruments of informal control in increasingly secularised societies.

Informal Social Control

Informal social control refers to the subtle, non-institutional methods through which communities guide behaviour. It works primarily through the internalisation of norms and values acquired during the process of socialisation. These embedded values shape an individual’s moral compass and affect behaviour without the need for overt coercion.
Belief systems, cultural traditions, and shared customs are central to this form of control. Sociologist Edward A. Ross emphasised that collective belief systems exercise stronger influence over human behaviour than formal laws because they are woven into everyday life and identity.
Informal sanctions vary widely across social groups and contexts. They may include:

• Shame, ridicule, and sarcasm
• Disapproval or criticism
• Social discrimination
• Social exclusion

Such sanctions reinforce conformity by rewarding acceptable behaviour and discouraging deviance. In mild forms, a disapproving gesture may act as a corrective. In more extreme social environments, such as organised crime, severe sanctions may be imposed for perceived transgressions.
Psychological conditioning contributes to this mechanism. Positive reinforcement rewards compliance, whereas negative reinforcement or punishment discourages undesirable actions. Because informal controls become internalised within personality structures, they often exert more sustained influence than formal punishments.
Media systems may also operate as informal mechanisms. Some theorists argue that systemic biases shape public perceptions and legitimate dominant social norms, thereby indirectly guiding behaviour.

Formal Social Control

Formal social control consists of explicit rules, regulations, and sanctions imposed by governmental or organisational authorities. It includes laws, judicial processes, regulatory policies, and institutional penalties that enforce societal expectations. Sanctions under formal control range from fines and restrictions to incarceration and, in some contexts, more severe limitations such as expulsion, censorship, or restrictions on political activity.
Legal systems exemplify this mechanism. Courts adjudicate offences and impose punishments, thereby reinforcing boundaries of acceptable behaviour. Empirical studies indicate correlations between levels of enforcement—such as frequent arrests and higher incarceration rates—and reductions in specific categories of crime.
Formal control not only defines prohibited behaviours but also expresses collective moral standards. For example, laws governing sexual conduct have historically reflected prevailing values. Homosexuality was long criminalised in Western nations but has been widely decriminalised in line with evolving social attitudes. However, laws governing incest or age of consent persist, demonstrating society’s continuing interest in regulating specific types of relationships.

Techniques and Mechanisms

A variety of techniques are employed to enforce formal social control:

• Law: A central regulatory tool that codifies acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.
• Selective incentives: Mechanisms that reward individuals who contribute to collective goods and punish those who do not, thereby encouraging cooperation.
• Confrontational measures: Such as riot or crowd control strategies used to manage disorder.
• Preventative measures: Legislation, surveillance, and regulations designed to deter deviance before it occurs.
• Complementary measures: Punitive responses to offences, reinforcing preventative systems.

Urban governance provides additional examples. Municipal authorities may impose park exclusion orders, trespass regulations, or “stay out” restrictions (e.g., SODA or SOAP orders) to manage populations viewed as disruptive or vulnerable. These spatial controls limit individuals’ mobility and freedom, especially affecting homeless populations who rely on public spaces. By constraining movement, such measures indirectly regulate behaviour and maintain urban order.
These mechanisms share common themes: delineating boundaries of acceptable behaviour, constraining access to space, and imposing penalties for noncompliance. They function together to maintain social order, even though they may disproportionately affect marginalised groups.