Download Understanding the Link between Identity Theory and Social Categories - Prof. Dawn Robinson and more Study notes History of Psychology in PDF only on Docsity! ● TST (20 statements test). a. Answers are identities b. Developed by Manfred Kuhn and Thomas McPartland in the 1950s c. Instrument designed to scientifically measure selfconcept d. Classic coding categories ■ Groups, classifications ■ Ideological beliefs ■ Interests ■ etc. e. Self made up of lots of identities ● Selfconcept a. Self (I) > Selfconcept (Me) > Social Identity, Dispositions, Physical ■ Social Identity: broad social categories others recognize a person to belong, ● daughter, American, alcoholic ■ Dispositions: selfreferring, attitudes, traits, values, abilities ● liberal, altruistic, patriotic, dogged ■ Physical characteristics ● slim, deaf, strong ■ both necessary for self: ● I comes first acts, does things (Subject) (subjective) ● Me (object that is acted upon) (objective) ● Blue Dot Test: how they figure out when reflexivity occurs. a. we know they have passed when they pass this test. b. try to rub off a blue dot ● second order expectations: what we think others think of us helps us become sophisticated social actors. a. need generalized other: packaging of “they”. role theory ● Self: source and objective of reflexive behavior (overall) ● Identity: a source of selfmeaning (pieces) a. May be positional (rolebased) or dispositional ● Position: a designated location in a social system (status) ● Role: a set of expectations associated with occupancy of a position (how to behave w/ status( ● Counterrole (to be a student, you need a professor). a. some require to fully exist. ● Referencegroup: specific generalized others we make use of (ex. how do you know you’re athletic, smart, etc. One of those ways is reference groups) a. normative (positive, negative): groups of ppl that we want to be like or not be like b. comparison (positive, negative): comparing yourself to others (more statistic where you fall) Self as Object ● selfconcept: the totality of an individual’s thoughts and feelings with the self as the object ● selfesteem: the evaluative component of the selfconcept Where does the selfconcept come from? ● Reflected appraisals (evaluations from people around us about what kind of person we are) ○ Self we acquire is the looking glass self ● social comparisons ○ come between the two developmentally develop w/ peer group interactions (require flexibility and data) siblings usually the first and equality ● selfobservations: ability to look at self with generalized other in mind. Changes over Historical Time (in Western culture) ● Identity in Medieval Europe ○ Rigidly structured ○ Single transformations ○ Religion ○ Literature ● Reformation/Renaissance ○ Breakdown of feudal system increased mobility ○ Variation in life outcomes ○ Religious choices ■ Protestism (Collective to Individualized) mandated later. ■ Predistination ○ major developments during reformation/renaissance ■ hidden self ● shakespeare, plato part of you you could hided ● autobiography, subconscious invented ● privileging individuals over collective (inverted priority scheme) ■ architecture ● corridor, french introduced hallway. before large and one roomed structures. smaller rooms, specialized purposes. royalty had it not regular folks. new norms valuing of privacy and specialization. ■ privacy ● we got obsessive about privacy re: sex. ● escalated ■ death ● we got more stuff & to think about what to do with stuff, legacy, etc. ■ marriage ● before community decisions, ~~romantic love~~ popularized, rise in importance of family in these decisions ■ childhood ● aries we created the concept of childhood then. before didn’t treat children much differently no dressing differently, diff activities, etc. not sheltered. responsibility for children and outcomes (predestination) has the self always been this way? lol no changing even now (ex. turner tst). less rolebased. selfesteem relatively stable because early on stuff more important (more stable than selfconcept) you later get locked into trajectories. ○ Identity representations contain an evaluative component that influences selfesteem ○ Social identities separate into Us vs Them ○ Strong Motivation to Maintain ingroup/outgroup comparisons that favor ingroup (and self) ○ Two underlying cognitive processes ■ Social Categorization ● Sharpens intergroup boundaries ● Assigns people to categories ■ SelfEnhancement (tends to tie into selfesteem) ● Ingroup norms ● Stereotypes ○ Fluid Identities ■ BIRGING/CORFING ○ shit in pronouns by fans based on whether team won or lost. fans~ ● BIRGING: basking in reflected glory ● CORFING: casting off reflected failure ■ Self as Model of Excellence ■ Identity and IQ ■ Identity and Helping Understanding Influence and Inequality ● Separating cultural from structural influences. ● “that’s not sharing” invokes the norms ○ Power: structure (can be taken, can be dominance drive, sometimes implicit need to have capacity to beat someone up) ○ Status: culture (deferrence drive) ● Influence ○ Contagion (sasquash): bottom up mimic ■ dancing and people joining in dancing ■ “tipping point” point where nearly irresistible ○ Conformity (funt): top down pressure ■ Candid camera ○ Obedience/Compliance (milgram) hierarchy ■ Milgram’s Experiment: authority/obedience (shock/teaching) ● To carry out awful acts, you must shed responsibility. ● Student of conformity dude (line study thing). ○ Asch’s Line Judgement Research ■ analyzed conformity to a unanimous majority ■ only need one person to agree to be able to hold their ground ○ Deference (occupy) hierarchy ■ Collective social innovation (shouting so ppl in the back could hear) ○ Mimicry/Emulation (infant) ■ copying teaches us babies are fake bitches ONLY SMILING BECAUSE WE ARE ● facial expressions: some learned, some fundamental ● way we dress, distance you stand next to people, etc. one way we communicate status of relationship ● Sherif’s Norm Development Research ○ Analyzed conformity to an ambiguous reality. ○ Subjects in a dark room looking at a point of light believed the light began to move (the autokinetic effect). ■ you would get an array of answers. If asked to talk about and write down, the same information would be reported. hard to anchor memory. didn’t know what they saw so were like sure that story works Explaining Inequality ● Status comes from culture ● Driven by deference ● Status Characteristics Theory: features of individuals that take on more than one valich status which are differentially evaluated by society around which status can be given ● Diffuse Status Characteristics:en = ○ general, crosssituational (carried from setting to setting) ○ low impact in any given setting ○ people operate as though these matter even when they don’t only matter when they matter/ ppl think are relevant). ● Specific Status Characteristics: ○ specific to immediate task or setting ○ high impact in immediate setting ● Status Generalization ○ The process by which characteristics come to influence expectations for performance. We guess about whose inputs will be important ■ use more qualifiers ■ characteristics > expectations > behavior ■ established and stablized prtty quickly ○ Scope Conditions ■ there is a valued task ■ there is an ability instrumental to the task ■ actors are tasked focus (ex. we have to care about the task) ■ actors are collectivelyoriented (some how to seem better than others, and other ppl bringing in drama ○ Postulates: ■ Expectation advantage leads to power and prestige order (expectation advantage) ● differentiation salient if more than one genders in a room ■ To affect expectations, characteristics must be salient (salience) ■ Once salient, characteristics will affect expectations unless proved irrelevant (burden of proof) ■ When new factors become salient, they connect to all other factors already salient, strengthening or contradicting their implications for expectations (structure completion) ■ Negative factors are weighted by relevance and combined; then they are subtracted from the weighted and combined positive elements () ■ some people with one value and other value in immediate scene (room of beautiful ppl beauty doesn’t matter). You can interfere with status generalizations. ● Characteristics > Expectations > Behavior ● in gestalt studied together ● when institutions are gendered (masculine institution), a group of women may interact differently than a group working in feminine institution. Gender: look at change in the meaning of gender as a status characteristic Power ● arises from structure ● driven by dominance Equity ● Justice based Discrimination Status Characteristics Theory ● Functionalist Roots out of bales/parsons tradition (everything serves a purpose) ○ think of evolution, doesn’t explain problems doesn’t account for social change ○ Bales Tradition ■ Emergence of Structure in Small Groups ■ Size 620 person groups ■ Interaction process analysis (IPA) ■ Emergence of Structure ■ Sociology’s First Law: Harmonic distribution of influence ● person who speaks the most: 44% of the time ● person who speaks the second most: 27% of the time ● audible (social class, different coloring,, etc up shang ● Developed by Berger, Cohen, Zelditch, and Dornbusch ● Describes how features of individuals “status generalize” or come to impact observable influence structures. ● Status Generalization. The process by which characteristics come to influence expectations for performance. (Look around, access each other, influences how we treat one another.) ○ Characteristics > Expectations > Behavior ○ How confidently we express opinions and look to others for their own contributions. ○ Lost interest: stop looking at person, stop responding/ leaning forward. ○ “Negotiation rather than manipulation” ○ Functionalist: have to because we can’t just let everyone talk and we want the best solution. ○ How we take info that we believe irrelevant and use it anyway. ○ Theoretic construct: can’t be accessed or measured empirically. ■ Expectation: you have to view heavily by culture (we pretend the expectations are there) ■ Weight of characters vary per culture (ex. gender) ● Two Routes to Salience ○ Differentiation (for diffuse characteristics)