Social psychology (sociology)

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

This article is about the subfield of sociology. For the subfield of psychology, see social psychology.

Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

In sociology, social psychology, also known as sociological social psychology, socio-psychology, or psychological sociology, is an area of sociology that focuses on social actions and on interrelations of personality, values, and mind with social structure and culture. Some of the major topics in this field are sociocultural change, social inequality and prejudice, leadership and intra-group behavior, social exchange, group conflict, impression formation and management, conversation structures, socialization, social constructionism, social norms and deviance, identity and roles, and emotional labor. The primary methods of data collection are sample surveys, field observations, vignette studies, field experiments, and controlled experiments.

History

Sociological social psychology was born in 1902 with the landmark study by sociologist Charles Horton Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order, which presented Cooley's concept of the looking glass self. The first textbook in social psychology by a sociologist appeared in 1908 — Social Psychology by Edward Alsworth Ross. The area's main journal was founded as Sociometry by Jacob L. Moreno in 1937. The journal's name changed to Social Psychology in 1978, and to Social Psychology Quarterly in 1979.

In the 1920s W. I. Thomas contributed the notion of the definition of the situation, with the proposition that became a basic tenet of sociology and sociological social psychology: "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences."

One of the major currents of theory in this area sprang from work by philosopher and sociologist George Herbert Mead at the University of Chicago from 1894 forward. Mead generally is credited as the founder of symbolic interactionism. Mead's colleague and disciple at Chicago, sociologist Herbert Blumer, coined the name of the framework in 1937.

Sociologist Talcott Parsons, at Harvard University from 1927 forward, developed a cybernetic theory of action which was adapted to small group research by Parsons' student and colleague, Robert Freed Bales, resulting in a body of observational studies of social interaction in groups using Bales' behavior coding scheme, Interaction Process Analysis.[1] During his 41-year tenure at Harvard, Bales mentored a distinguished group of sociological social psychologists concerned with group processes and other topics in sociological social psychology.[2]

Major Frameworks

Symbolic interactionism

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Main article: Symbolic interactionism

Contemporary symbolic interactionism originated out of ideas of George Herbert Mead and Max Weber. In this framework meanings are constructed during social interaction, and constructed meanings influence the process of social interaction. Many symbolic interactionists see the self as a core meaning constructed through social relations, and influencing social relations.

The structural school of symbolic interactionism uses shared social knowledge from a macro-level culture, natural language, social institution, or organization to explain relatively enduring patterns of social interaction and psychology at the micro-level, typically investigating these matters with quantitative methods. Identity Theory,[3] Affect Control Theory,[4] and the Iowa School[5] are major programs of research in this tradition. Identity Theory and Affect Control Theory both focus on how actions control mental states, thereby manifesting the underlying cybernetic nature of the approach, evident in Mead's writings[6] Affect Control Theory provides a mathematical model of Role Theory and of Labeling Theory.

Process symbolic interactionism stems from the Chicago School and considers the meanings underlying social interactions to be situated, creative, fluid, and often contested. Researchers in this tradition frequently use qualitative and ethnographic methods. A journal, Symbolic Interaction, was founded in 1977 by the Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction as a central outlet for the empirical research and conceptual studies produced by scholars in this area.

Postmodern symbolic interactionists understand the notions of self and identity to be increasingly fragmented and illusory, and consider attempts at theorizing to be meta-narratives with no more authority than other conversations. The approach is presented in detail by The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research.[7]

Social exchange

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Main article: Social exchange theory

Social exchange theory emphasizes the idea that social action is the result of personal choices made in order to maximize benefits and minimize costs. A key component of this theory is the postulation of the "comparison level of alternatives", which is the actor's sense of the best possible alternative (i.e. the choice with the highest net benefits or lowest net costs).

Theories of social exchange share many essential features with classical economic theories like rational choice theory. However, social exchange theories differ from economic theories by making predictions about the relationships between persons, and not just the evaluation of goods. For example, social exchange theories have been used to predict human behaviour in romantic relationships by taking into account each actor's subjective sense of costs (i.e., volatility, economic dependence), benefits (i.e., attraction, chemistry, attachment), and comparison level of alternatives (i.e., if any viable alternative mates are available).

Expectation states

Expectation States Theory argues that individuals make use of any information available to them to create performance expectations for other actors. Differences in power and prestige are associated with status characteristics (race, sex, age, etc.) providing perceived structural advantage over others with more limited access to resources. The theory has been used to describe the enactment of gender inequality.[citation needed]

Social structure and personality

This research perspective deals with relationships between large-scale social systems and individual behaviors and mental states including feelings, attitudes and values, and mental faculties.[8] Some researchers focus on issues of health and how social networks bring useful social support to the ill. Another line of research deals with how education, occupation, and other components of social class impact values. Some studies assess emotional variations, especially in happiness versus alienation and anger, among individuals in different structural positions.

Another aspect of social psychology aims to focus on individual behavior in social settings. One specific researcher in the field, Erving Goffman, claims that humans tend to believe that they are actors on a stage. He explains his theories in his book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. He argues that as a result, individuals will further proceed with their actions based on the response of that individual's 'audience' or in other words, the people to whom he is speaking. Much like a play, Goffman believes that rules of conversing and communication exist: to display confidence, display sincerity, and avoid infractions which are otherwise known as embarrassing situations. Breaches of such rules are what make social situations awkward.[9]

Social influence

<templatestyles src="Module:Hatnote/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Main article: Social influence

Social Influence is a factor in every individual's life. Social influence takes place when one's thoughts, actions and feelings are affected by other people. It is a way of interaction that affects individual behavior and can occur within groups and between groups. It is a fundamental process that affects ways of socialization, conformity, leadership and social change.[10]

See also

References

  1. ↑ Bales, Robert Freed (1950), Interaction Process Analysis, New York: Addison-Wesley. Some studies using the method are included in Hare, A. Paul, Edgar F. Borgatta, & R. F. Bales (1955), Small Groups: Studies in Social Interaction, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
  2. ↑ See the list of Bales' students at pages 332-3 of R. F. Bales (1999), Social Interaction Systems: Theory and Measurement, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
  3. ↑ Stryker, Sheldon, & Burke, Peter J. (2000). "The past, present, and future of an identity theory". Social Psychology Quarterly 63: 284–297. Burke, P. J., and Jan E. Stets (2009). Identity Theory, New York, Oxford University Press.
  4. ↑ Heise, David R. (1979). Understanding Events: Affect and the Construction of Social Action, New York: Cambridge University Press. MacKinnon, N. J. (1994). Symbolic Interactionism as Affect Control, Albany, NY, State University of New York Press. Heise, D. R. (2007). Expressive Orider: Confirming Sentiments in Social Actions, New York, Springer.
  5. ↑ Miller, Dan E. (2011). "Toward a Theory of Interaction: The Iowa School," Symbolic Interaction 34: 340-348.
  6. ↑ MacKinnon, Neil J. (1994). Symbolic Interactionism as Affect Control, Albany, NY, State University of New York Press. Pp. 3-5.
  7. ↑ Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonna S. Lincoln, Eds. (2005). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications.
  8. ↑ McLeod, Jane D. and Kathryn J. Lively (2003). “Social Structure and Personality.” Pp. 77-102 in Handbook of Social Psychology edited by J. DeLamater. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.
  9. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  10. ↑ Smith, J. R., Louis, W. R., & Schultz, P. W. (2011). Introduction: Social influence in action. Group Processes & GP Intergroup Relations, 14(5), 599–603.

External links

Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Social_psychology_(sociology)&oldid=716146825"