Social Interactions and Psychology - Essay Example

? Social Competence: Social interactions are inevitable even in the wake of the current individualistic of affairs. Mead (1934) saw this inevitability and went forth to examine possible approaches to make these interactions work. As such, he developed three approaches to achieve social competence. These requirements encompass sense of self, language for expressing the inner self and the looking glass self. The idea is to utilize these three requirements in a way that suits the individual best while maintaining a meaningful relationship with the rest of the world. Achieving social competence requires balanced interaction with the cognitive state of individual, psychological dispositions and cultures the individual practices (Lovaglia, 2007). Until the 1970’s sociologists underscored the investigation of emotion as a relevant field in sociology (Stets, 2007). However, with the discovery that human behavior, interaction and social structuring relies on emotional expression, sociologists delve into manners of human expression such as language. Language is a main way through which people express their emotion. Therefore, developing linguistic faculties aids humans in acquiring the sense of self through expression of their emotions. Language defines symbolic interaction as it is the means through which culture moves form one generation to the next. Language is not only a symbol but its use elicits symbols through which humans understand each other. For instance, one may choose obscene words to refer to a situation or person. This obscene language expresses anger or disappointment. One can see that Mead (1934) succeeds in his intention of highlighting the importance of language in social psychology (James, 2007). Through an interaction of an array of possible developmental stages as suggested by various theorists, an individual reaches a compromise of the best possible self. A few of these theories include latent trait theory and, in view of Herbert Mead, mainly cognitive theory. Sense of self involves creating a distinction between the self and others. These distinctions are as basic as knowing ones gender. The sense of self, therefore, relies on knowing what role one plays in society. The position affiliated to a person is a symbol of the self as it guides the social interactions they engage. For instance, an individual when analyzing an occurrence will ask “who” did what to “whom”? Even in the constantly changing roles, self identity is responsible for stability and coherence, in regard to social interactions, for the individual. However, Mead points out that the self needs to be as flexible as possible. This will help the individual to self conceptualize and, therefore, create the unique self (Stets, 2007). The sense of self lays a foundation for development of self esteem. Without self esteem, an individual will have a hard time balancing their inner feelings with those people hold towards them. Secondly, the individual will have a hard time expressing their emotions even with a grasp on linguistic faculties and their perceived meanings. The result of this is deviants in society as seen in crime, and sexual expression. Social competence should be emphasized in childhood as early as possible. Jean Piaget viewed young children as little scientists. He was of the view that children are capable of deciphering situations and actions through perception. Therefore, it is possible to introduce self control to the child as it will help them associate it with self esteem even later in life. According to Siegel in his book “Criminology: Theories Patterns and Typology”, research reveals that low self control during childhood may result in disrupted social bonds. This means that, in adulthood, the individual will not have meaningful social interactions due to low self esteem. This is a sure way to fall in to some forms of crime as prescribed by latent trait theory. The same can apply to sexual interactions that have a direct correlation to self esteem. Siegel (2012) further notes that emphasis of social competence especially in the elementary stage helps reduce chances of individuals engaging in harmful sexual practices later in life (Handel, 2006). Symbolic interaction is a core theory in explaining social interaction. Roles, language, and perceptions provide shared meanings through which society interacts. From the three concepts of self competence, Mead concluded that people act mostly to maintain equilibrium in regard to the symbols they uphold. Social disequilibrium can take many forms and, therefore, creates a number of resulting behaviors in regard to social competence (Shepard, 2009). However, there is a discrepancy that lays doubt on who is in control of the self. Kendall (2011) reports that, George Simmel postulates; culture, rather than the individual, determines the nature of the self. As such, culture determines how the individual behaves and how they utilize their social competence. One can conclude that culture shapes the self. However, Kendall (2011) also notes that people create maintain and modify culture to suit their needs. Therefore, people influence self concept to a large extent. People influence others through the language they use to communicate. One can get cues from the tone or pitch used to comment on an action. Another way is observing how people act out their roles in relation to others around them. From this argument, the looking glass concept emerges (Shepard, 2009). The looking glass self is the idea that people react to the perceptions society has of them directly or indirectly. Mead phrases this situation as such “…through cognitive procedures, individuals reflect on the appraisals of people around them…” the individual then responds to these opinions in various ways that interact to create self. The looking glass self derives from the culture of a people (Dumont, 2010). Charles Horton Cooley holds that society will reflect approval or otherwise in relation to how well an action sits with their prescribed culture. In regard to the looking glass self, Handel in his book “Childhood Socialization” notes that individuals rely on the social interactions they have to seek self affirmation. When a child gathers that others place them in high regard, they develop a positive attitude towards the self which is a sure way to build their self esteem. For instance, children are naive, but the amount of affirmation they get from people around them helps them distinguish meaningful relationships from demeaning ones (Handel, 2006). This approach can explain how persons with previous poor self concepts avert from crime or seek to engage in fulfilling rather than abusive relationships. In high school, I was a shy, reserved person. My self concept was that of an introvert. In light of this, I kept few friends and sometimes none at all. I also used as few words as possible to express myself which caused me a lot of misunderstanding. There were three parties whose opinions mattered to me. The first group was my parents. They were social people, who stopped to ask about the neighbor’s welfare. They held dinners with their friends, and they seemed to enjoy the company. Often they asked me to invite my friends over for dinner. From my parents, I learnt that being social makes one happy. They also looked at me like a social person which I was not. The second group was my teachers. They would often ask me questions in class which I thought was unfair considering my reluctance to raise my hand. They taught me that it is alright to voice opinions, and they thought I was capable of expressing myself. The last group was my peers. They were in clubs, went for camps and outings together which they invited me. They saw me like themselves in regard to age. They assumed I wanted to shop with them and made the activity look age appropriate. From this experience, though I maintained my shy nature, I tried socializing more, shared my problems and made a few friends. Psychology, while referring to the self, focuses on the inner being. The development of social psychology is a breakthrough in eliminating the misconception that individual’s actions are mainly a reflection of the inner being. It is imperative to note that the perceived appraisals, in view of the looking glass self, are not only subject to the individual’s interpretations but are particularly imaginative. As such, the looking glass self may give a distorted image. Sociologist Charles Horton builds on the works of Herbert Mead, in light of the likelihood of distortion, develops the “I” and “Me” self concepts. These sociologists hold that humans are “I” is the active, creative self while “Me” is the reflexive self that relies on societal appraisal. A healthy human being needs both these selves in equilibrium in order to achieve social competence (Dumont, 2010). In other cases, there are so many mirrors an individual is at a crossroad as to which to rely on. To this problem William James responds that the social self does not take a singular form. This is to say that different social situations elicit different reactions from an individual. From each reaction, a different social self may appear (James, 2007). Existence of multiple looking glasses, or the situational misinterpretations of the looking glass self do not avert the fact that most human interaction and social competence rely on the looking glass (Shepard, 2009). References: Dumont, F. (2010). A History of Personality Psychology: Theory, Science, and Research from Hellenism to the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Handel, G. (2006). Childhood Socialization. New York: Transaction Publishers. James, W. (2007). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Cosimo, Inc. Kendall, D. (2011). Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials. New York: Cengage Learning. Lovaglia, M. J. (2007). Knowing People: The Personal Use of Social Psychology. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Shepard, J. M. (2009). Sociology. New York: Cengage Learning. Siegel, L. J. (2012). Criminology: Theories, Patterns, and Typologies. New York: Cengage Learning. Stets, J. E. (2007). Handbook of the Sociology of Emotions. New York : Springer. Read More