In terms of primary versus secondary deviance, which statement is correct?

The notion of primary and secondary deviance is grounded in the labeling theory of deviance. Primary deviance refers to initial acts of rule-breaking that do not result in long-term consequences or label the individual as deviant—these acts are often minor and can go unnoticed by society. This can include behaviors that may be considered as deviant by some norms but do not substantially affect an individual's self-identity or social standing because they are not widely recognized or sanctioned.

In contrast, secondary deviance occurs when an individual internalizes the deviant label as a result of society's reaction to their primary deviance. This often leads to a more entrenched pattern of behavior. Therefore, the characteristic of primary deviance often going unnoticed is accurate because many initial acts do not attract attention or lead to a change in how the individual is perceived by others.

The other options do not align with the key concepts of primary and secondary deviance. For example, primary deviance does not necessarily lead to criminal records—many acts may be deemed non-criminal. Secondary deviance often carries more serious consequences as it can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy of being labeled deviant. Lastly, secondary deviance can be just as severe or more severe than primary