Studying the self Part 1 Flashcards
What is the self?
SSP - SI perspective
social product /social force
can in turn guide social behavior
The development of the self
how the self is created and maintained within a specific social context
What is the self: Rohall
“a process in which we construct a sense of who we are through interaction with others”
self is a process, the self can change over time
“self-concept”
The sum total of thoughts and feelings people have about themselves as objects
step outside ourselves and view ourselves, everything we think about and feel is our self-concept
a “thing” we can reflect on, and this through the self-process we rake ourselves as objects
Snapshot
understandings people have about themselves
as we interact with people or new situations, this snapshot may change
The looking glass self (cooley)
the reaction of others serve as mirrors in which people see and evaluate themselves just as they see and evaluate other objects in their social environment
the reactions of others serve as mirrors in which we see and evaluate ourselves - informing our self-concepts
the self as a social product
the emergence of our self-concept requires other people to reflect an image
without others, we don’t have a mirror
our self-concept is based on how we think others see us, not how others see us
Appraisals
reflected, actual, self
Reflected appraisals
how we think other people see us
Actual appraisals
how other people see us
leads to self-appraisals
Self-appraisals
judgments we make about ourselves
-self is based on reflection
Actual and reflected appraisals are only
weakly associated
Why is there a distinction
people rarely honestly provide feedback
feedback is inconsistent and contradictory
feedback is often ambiguous and difficult to interpret (little context, ex: texting, shrug)
Role-taking
seeing yourself from another’s perspective
create reflected appraisals that influence the self-concept
the self-concept is generally relatively stable but can change over time
When are reflections influential
“Reflected appraisals are most important in the development of the self-concept when there are no clear criteria or objective feedback as a basis for self-views”
when we do not have an external indication of who we are, we use what we imagine are others’ judgments as a guide
If we cant really judge on external criteria, we may use self-reflected appraisals of judging ourselves
the origin of the self
initially formed
Multi-stage process
Mead also the founder of SI
Preparatory stage
infant stage - when behaviors are primarily biological reactions
do not have a sense of self-separate from others
children imitate the behavior of others w/o understanding the meaning of it
Play stage
When children are beginning to hone their language skills
children must act out a role to obtain the perspective of the other
limited to one person at a time
Multiple roles
Children know that multiple roles exist, but do not understand how multiple roles may be intertwined
ex: mother, sister, aunt
function of generalized other
We can envision what “they” (society as a whole) would think of us and how “they” would view us if we engaged in different behaviors
a social control function because we care about what others think, even if we don’t know them
We experience sympathy, shame, guilt, and pride through the generalized other
Me
socialized side of the self
takes into consideration the imagined view of others
I
a spontaneous, active, sometimes impulsive aspect of the self
the active part of the self, with society residing in the “me”
Importance of I and ME
Even though the Me may indicate the judgements of society, we do not always have to behave in accordance with these judgements
The I allows us to deviate from societal expectations
We can resist these views because they conflict with previous experiences of self-concepts
Ex: someone says your dumb, but other experiences of yours prove that you aren’t
The genesis of the Self
Slowly develop a self-concept through learning role-taking
Learning role-taking is in turn inherently social, because we learn to take the perspective of other through interaction
self develops in close contact
Social comparisons
the process of thinking about information about one or more other people in relation to the self”
People both learn about and assess themselves (take self as object) through comparisons with others
Why do we compare?
we have a “drive” to evaluate our opinions and abilities
We may especially be likely to use social comparisons when we cannot rely on “objective” information
Ex: Grocery store, buying junk versus someone else buying a salad
we may also use social comparisons to evaluate emotions, personality traits, and self-concepts
“self-enhancement,” or creating a more positive view of the self
We may make “downward comparisons,” ourselves to someone less fortunate
E.g., someone else with a lower test score than you
Ex: got into a car accident but my friend got into 3 accidents
self-improvement
“upward comparisons” by comparing one’s self to another who is deemed social better in some way
Ex: Judy got a better score than me, I should be able to do that too (if she can do it, I can do it too)
We may use this comparison as an aspirational or motivational tool towards reaching a goal
Realistic comparisons
people compare themselves to real others in making evaluations
used when seeking to gauge self-appraisals against “objective” criteria
Constructive comparisons
“individuals may ignore social reality and instead fabricate, make up, manufacture, and construct persons for comparison”
used when wanting to engage in self-enhancement
Previous accomplishments/ self-evaluations
Our previous achievements can give us a sense of “self-efficacy”
A belief that we can master something or make something happen
Our sense of self-efficacy will in turn likely serve to motivate our future actions
Electronic communication
“computer mediated communication”
that physical cues are not available, so feedback obtained through CMC may be less influential because there are fewer avenues to connect
ex: vagueness through text
your book points out that teens are heavy users of CMC, when feedback from others may be especially influential
not constrained by geographic and institutional factors
can be superficial
The digital self: inwardly oriented
People use CMC to communicate about thoughts and feelings
ex: Is Kylie Jenner using Instagram to talk about feelings?
idealized self than an actual self
The digital self: a story
A self-presentation others expect ot be coherent and consistent
The digital self: retractable
We can delete a digital self
Ex: revenge porn
The digital self: multiplied
we can have more than one digital self
Cross cultural issues
Studies of the self are also often based within a specific culture
Based on WEIRD samples
This can influence results, because there may be an underlying assumption that individuals are self-reflective
Western conception of the self
general concept of the self as a autonomous, independent, and bounded
“independent self” - individuals whose behavior is made meaningful mainly by reference to one’s own thoughts, feelings, and actions rather than by reference to the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others
Others primarily confirm our sense of self
the interdependent self
Focus is not on one’s inner self or being distinctive from others
Instead, “how to fit in with other people and be connected in particular contexts, to fulfill and create obligations in relationships, and to become part of various interpersonal relationships in different social contexts
The difference: a context-dependent self
Others are assigned much more importance and consideration in when choosing courses of action in social contexts
The squeaky wheel gets the grease vs. the nail that stands out gets pounded down
The core self
a stable set of meanings attached to self providing stability to personality, continuity to interactions, and predictability to behavior
We are not always recreating ourselves, there is stability
How you behave will have some stability, in every situation, you will not change
Basis of the argument for the core self
was argued that once social structure is created, future action is constrained
Core self and structure
provided a sense of consistency across situations
the idea of a core self could help explain how social structure impacted the self
the core self resulted in action, structural arrangements were perpetuated and maintained
Styker and SI
an identity salience hierarchy
saw the self-concept as a set of identities
Nature of identity
our internalized, stable sense of who we are, including role identities, social categories, and personal characteristics
But, for Stryker, “role identities” were particularly important
-role identities are acquired from the positions we occupy
Social learning and positions
Styker - one learns from social interaction how to classify objects
one learns expectations for behavior associated with these objects
This includes symbols used to designate positions
Ex: student, teacher
Different expectation for different positions
