From a sociological perspective, social norm is an informal understanding governing the behavior of community members. Social psychology recognizes smaller group units, such as teams or offices, can also support norms separately or in addition to cultural or community expectations. In other words, norms are regarded as collective representations of acceptable group behavior as well as individual perceptions of specific group behaviors. They can be seen as cultural products (including values, customs, and traditions) that represent an individual's basic knowledge of what others do and think they should do it.
Furthermore, in the field of social psychology, the role of norms is emphasized that can guide behavior in a particular situation or environment as "a mental representation of appropriate behavior". For example, it has been shown that normative messages can promote pro-social behavior, including reducing alcohol use and increasing voter participation. According to the psychological definition of the social norms' behavioral component, norms have two dimensions: how many behaviors are exhibited, and how many groups approve the behavior. These two dimensions can be used in the normative message to change the norm and then change the behavior; for example, messages can target previous dimensions by describing high voter turnout to encourage more voters. At the same time, norms can also be changed depending on the behavior observed by others (how many behaviors are exhibited).
Video Social norm
Behavior
Norms that are contrary to widespread societal or cultural behavior can be transmitted and maintained within a small subgroup of society. For example, Crandall (1988) notes that certain groups (eg, cheerleading squads, dance groups, sports teams, student societies) have a level of bulimia, a life-threatening disease that is publicly recognized, which is much higher than the society as a whole. Social norms have a way of maintaining order and organizing groups.
Maps Social norm
Social control
Although not regarded as a formal law in society, norms still serve to promote great social control. They are statements that govern behavior. The cultural phenomenon which is the norm is the acceptable behavior perception in specific examples. Ranging in variations depends on the culture, race, religion, and geographic location, it is the basis of some acceptable terms as not to hurt others, the golden rule, and to keep promises promised. Without them, there would be a world without consensus, similarity, or restriction. Although state laws and laws are not meant to control social norms, society and law are inherently linked and others determine others. This is why it has been said that the language used in some laws is to control and dictate what should or should not be accepted. For example, the criminalization of family sexual relationships is said to protect those who are vulnerable, yet even approved adults can not have sexual relations with their families. The language surrounding these laws conveys the message that such acts are considered immoral and should be condemned, even though there are no actual victims in these approved relationships.
Social norms can be formally enforced (eg, through sanctions) or informally (eg, through body language and non-verbal communication cues.) Because individuals often obtain physical or psychological resources from group membership, the group is said to be in control of discretionary stimulus ; groups can withhold or provide more resources in response to member compliance with group norms, effectively controlling members' behavior through appreciation and operant conditioning. Social psychology research has found that the more individual values ​​controlled by the resource group or the more individuals view group membership as the center of their definition, the more likely it is to adapt. Social norms also allow an individual to assess what behaviors the group perceives to be important to its existence or survival, since it represents the codification of beliefs; groups generally do not punish members or make norms for actions they do not really care about. Norms in every culture create a conformity that allows people to socialize with the culture in which they live.
As social beings, individuals learn when and where appropriate to say certain things, use certain words, to discuss certain topics or wear certain clothes, and when not. Thus, knowledge of cultural norms is important for the impression, which is the individual arrangement of their nonverbal behavior. A person also knows through experiences of the kind of people he can and can not discuss certain topics with or wear certain types of clothing. Usually, this knowledge is passed on through experience (ie social norms learned through social interaction). Wearing a suit for a job interview to give a great first impression is a common example of social norms in the white-collar workforce.
Sociology
For Talcott Parsons of functionalist schools, norms dictate the interaction of people in all social gatherings. On the other hand, Karl Marx believes that norms are used to promote the creation of roles in society that enable people of different levels of social class structures to function properly. Marx claims that these power dynamics create a social order.
Heinrich Popitz believes that the formation of social norms, which make future action of the coming alter to the ego, solve the contingency problem (Niklas Luhmann). In this way, the ego can rely on those actions as if they had already been done and should not wait for the actual execution; accelerated social interaction. Important factors in the standardization of behavior are sanctions and social roles.
Appear and transmission
Rulemaking is one of the basic human drives to organize and simplify action. Every day there are new rules enacted, as well as older rules that are more structured for either groups or individuals. However, it is not just humans who make the rules, they are trying to find interrelated rules about how the world works. These rules, once accepted by individuals or groups after trial and error, then become the norm.
Groups can adopt norms in various ways. Norms can arise formally, in which groups explicitly describe and implement behavioral expectations. Club laws or rules serve as this example. A large number of these norms we follow 'naturally' like driving on the right side of the road in the US and on the left side in the UK, or not driving to avoid a ticket. Many formal norms serve to provide security to the general public.
However, social norms are far more likely to develop informally, emerging gradually as a result of repeated use of discretionary stimuli to control behavior. Not necessarily the law set out in writing, informal norms represent routines that are generally accepted and widely agreed that people follow in everyday life. These informal norms, if damaged, can not invite formal punishment or legal sanction, but instead encourage reprimands, warnings, or other matters; incest, for example, is generally considered wrong in society, but many jurisdictions do not legally prohibit it.
Transfer of norms between groups
Individuals can also import norms from previous organizations into their new groups, which can be adopted from time to time. Without a clear indication of how to act, people usually rely on their past history to determine the best course forward; what works before they can serve them well again. In groups, individuals can import various histories or scripts about appropriate behavior; General experience over time will lead the group to define its overall take on the right course of action, usually with the integration of multiple member schemes. Under the import paradigm, the formation of norms occurs subtly and quickly whereas with formal or informal development norms may be longer.
Groups internalize norms by accepting them as reasonable and reasonable standards for behavior in groups. Once established firmly, norms become part of the group's operational structure and therefore more difficult to change. While it may be possible for newcomers to a group to change their norms, it is likely that new individuals will adopt group norms, values, and perspectives, rather than vice versa.
Deviation is defined as "incompatibility with a set of norms received by a large number of people in the community or society." More simply, if group members do not follow the norm, they are labeled as aberrations. In sociological literature, this can often cause them to be considered wasted society. However, deviant behavior among children is somewhat expected. Unless the idea of ​​this irregularity manifests as a criminal act, the social tolerance given in the child's example is quickly withdrawn against the criminal. Evil is regarded as one of the most extreme deviations by scholar Clifford R. Shaw. What is considered "normal" is relative to the cultural location where social interaction is taking place. In psychology, an individual who routinely disobeys group norms risks turning into "institutionalized people". Similar to sociological definitions, institutionalized institutionalization can be assessed by other group members because of their failure to comply with norms. In the beginning, group members can increase the pressure on the unconformist, trying to involve the individual in the conversation or explaining why he should follow their behavioral expectations. The role in which a person decides whether or not to behave is highly determined on how their actions will affect others. Especially with new members who may not know better, groups can use discretionary stimuli to restore individual behavior into the queue. Over time, however, if members continue to disobey, the group will succumb to itself as a lost cause; while the group may not need to revoke its membership, they may only give it a superficial consideration. If a worker arrives late in the meeting, for example, violates the office timekeeping norm, a boss or another coworker can wait for someone to come and pull him aside then to ask what happened. If the behavior continues, eventually the group can start a meeting without him because the individual is "always late." The group generalizes the individual's disobedience and immediately dismisses him, thereby reducing the influence and footing of members in future group disagreements.
Group tolerance for deviations varies among members; not all members of the group receive equal treatment for violating the norm. Individuals can build a "reserve" of good behavior through suitability, which they can borrow later. This privilege credit provides theoretical currency for understanding variations in expectations of group behavior. A teacher, for example, may find it easier to forgive a straight-A student for being naughty - who has passed the "good credit" saved - rather than repeatedly annoying students. Although past performance may help build idiosyncrasy credit, some group members have a higher balance to start. Individuals may import privilege credits from other groups; Childhood movie stars, for example, who enroll in college, may experience more leeway in adopting school norms than new students enter. Finally, leaders or individuals in other high positions can start with more credit and appear to be "above the rules" at times. Even their idiosyncrasy credit is not without foundation; while holding to standards that are more lenient than average members, leaders may still face group resistance if their disobedience becomes too extreme.
Irregularities also cause many emotions experienced by a person against the norm. One such emotion can be widely associated with guilt. This emotion is connected with the task ethic which in turn becomes the main object of moral obligation. Guilt followed by questionable action after it has been done. It can be described as something negative to oneself as well as negative feelings. Used in both cases, it is an unpleasant feeling as well as a form of self-punishment. By using the metaphor of "dirty hands", it is a stain or a stain on the self and therefore must rid itself of dirt. This is a form of self-confronting reparation and is subject to the possibility of anger and punishment from others. Guilt is a point in action and feeling that acts as a stimulus for further "respectable" action.
Operation conditioning
The probability of this committed action was created for B. F. Skinner, which states that operant conditioning plays a role in the process of social norms. Operation conditioning is an improvement that action will occur again by increasing the reinforced response. This process is reward and punishment or trial and error. Hand in hand with irregularities, the consequences of a person's behavior, whether positive or negative, will determine the possibility of recurrence and the drive to regulate one's future decisions. Contains five subcategories, this conditioning treatment is an influence in the actions performed and the feelings that a person experiences afterwards. In the case of social aberrations, an individual who has violated the norm will feel the negative connotation that comes with opposing the taught conditioning because it indicates negative reinforcement. A perfect example is a little girl's painting on the wall of the house as she seeks her mother's approval of her artwork. When the child watches the mother placing her in "rest time," she realizes that if she paint on the wall again, it will lead to punishment that causes her to notice her negative reinforcement. Which then makes the probability of painting the walls again, greatly reduced. He also stated that humans are conditioned from a very young age about how to behave and how to act with those around us considering the outside influences of society and the location that exists. Built to blend with the atmosphere and attitude around us, deviation is the preferred action.
Normative behavior focus theory
Cialdini, Reno, and Kallgren developed normative behavioral focus theory to illustrate how individuals implicitly conjure various behavioral expectations at once; expanding on conflicting prior beliefs about whether cultural, situational or personal norms motivate action, the researchers suggest the focus of individual attention will determine what expectations of behavior they follow.
Type
Descriptive versus pronoun
Descriptive norms describe what happens, while legal norms explain what must should occur. Cialdini, Reno, and Kallgren (1990) define descriptive norms as people's perceptions of what is commonly done in certain situations; it signifies what most people do, without giving an assessment. The absence of garbage in the ground in the parking lot, for example, transmits descriptive norms that most people there do not litter. The injunctive norm, on the other hand, transmits group approval of certain behaviors; it dictates how an individual should behave. Watching others pick up trash from the ground and throw it away, a member of the group can take the legal norm that he should not litter.
Prescriptive and proscriptive
Prescriptive norms are unwritten rules that are understood and followed by society and show what we should do. Express gratitude or write cards Thank You when someone gives you a gift representing prescriptive norms in American culture. By contrast, the procretive norms comprise the other end of the same spectrum; they are also the unwritten rules of society about what should not be done. These norms can vary between cultures; while an acceptable greeting in some European countries, kissing strangers on the cheek is a pro-descriptive norm in the United States.
Subjective
Subjective norms are determined by beliefs about the extent to which other important people want them to behave in a manner. Social influences are conceptualized in terms of pressure that people perceive of others as important to do, or not to do, behavior.
Mathematical representation
Over the past few decades, some theorists have tried to explain social norms from a more theoretical point of view. By measuring behavior expectations graphically or trying to plot the logic behind compliance, theorists hope to predict whether people will adjust or not. The potential return model and game theory provide a slightly more economical conceptualization of norms, suggesting that individuals can calculate the costs or benefits behind possible behavioral outcomes. Under this theoretical framework, choosing to comply or violate the norm becomes a more deliberate and measurable decision.
Revert potential model
Developed in 1960, the potential return model provides a method for planning and visualizing group norms. In the field of regular coordinates, the number of behaviors shown are plotted on the X axis (label a in Fig 1) while the number of group acceptance or approval will be plotted on the Y axis ( b in Figure 1 ). The graph shows potential returns or positive results to individuals for a given behavioral norm. Theoretically, one can plan a point for any increase in behavior how much the group likes or dislikes the action. For example, it may occur among first year graduate students, a strong social norm around how many daily cups of coffee you drink exists. If the return curve in Figure 1 correctly displays examples of social norms, we can see that if a person drinks 0 cups of coffee a day, the group strongly disagrees. The group disagrees with the members' behavior until someone hits four cups of coffee a day; Graduate students (as represented by the return curve) find it excessive to drink more than seven cups, however, because of the re-approval of dips below zero. As coffee samples demonstrate, a potential return model is shown for each behavioral increase in how much group approval can be anticipated.
- Maximum return point. The point with the largest y coordinate is called the maximum return point, because it represents the number of behaviors most favored by the group. While c in FIG. 1 labeled the general return curve, the dot highlighted just above it at X = 6, representing the maximum return point. Extending the example above, the maximum point of return for first year graduate students is 6 cups of coffee; they received the most social consent to drink the many cups. More or fewer cups will lower approval.
- A tolerable range of behaviors. The label d represents the range of behaviors that can be tolerated, or the number of actions that can be accepted by the group. It covers all positive areas under the curve. In Figure 1, the range of widely tolerable behaviors is 3, since the group approves all behaviors from 4 to 7 and 7-4 = 3. Implementing our coffee samples again, we can see that the first years only agreed to have a number of coffee cups ( between 4 and 7); more than 7 cups or less than 4 will fall outside the range of tolerable behavior. Norms can have a narrower or wider range of behavior. Usually, the narrower range of behaviors exhibits behaviors with greater consequences for the group.
- Intensity. The intensity of the norm shows how much the group cares about the norm, or how much group influence is at stake to win or lose. This is represented in the potential return model with the total number of areas included by the curve, regardless of whether the area is positive or negative. Norms with low intensity will not differ much from the x axis; the number of consents or rejections for the given behavior will be close to zero. However, high intensity norms will have more extreme approval ratings. In Figure 1, the intensity of the norm appears high, as some behaviors demand a rating of indifference.
- Crystallization. Finally, the crystallization of the norm refers to how much difference there is in the curve; translated from theoretical back to the true norm, it shows how much agreement exists between group members about approval for a given set of behaviors. Perhaps some members believe norms are more important for group functions than others. Group norms like how many first-year cups of coffee should drink may have low crystallisation, as many individuals have different beliefs about the right amount of caffeine to absorb; Conversely, norms do not plagiarize the work of other students will likely have high crystallization, because people uniformly agree on unacceptable behavior. Showing the overall group norm, the potential return model in Figure 1 does not show crystallization. However, the potential return model that plots individual data points alongside the cumulative norms can show variance and allow us to infer crystallization.
Game Theory
Another common general framework that can be used to represent the essential elements of the social situation around the norm is a recurring game theory game. Rational choice, the branch of game theory, deals with relationships and actions that are socially undertaken among rational agents. A norm gives a person a rule of thumb for how they should behave. However, rational people only act according to the rules if they are optimal. The situation can be described as follows. A norm gives hope to how others act in certain situations (macro). Someone acts optimally with (micro) expectations. For a norm to be stable, one's actions must rearrange expectations without change (micro-macro feedback loop). A set of true stable expectations is known as Nash equilibrium. Thus, a stable norm must be Nash's equilibrium. In Nash equilibrium, no actor has a positive incentive in the individual deviation from a particular action. Social norms will be implemented if specific norms of action are agreed upon by Nash's support of balance in most theoretical approaches to the game.
From a theoretical-game point of view, there are two explanations for the various norms that exist throughout the world. One of them is the difference in the game. Different parts of the world can provide different environmental contexts and different people may have different values, which can lead to differences in the game. Another option is the equilibrium that can not be explained by the game itself. Equilibrium selection is closely related to coordination. For a simple example, driving is common throughout the world, but in some countries people are driving on the right and in other countries people are driving on the left (see coordination game). A framework called comparative institutional analysis is proposed to deal with the game's theoretical structural understanding of various social norms.
See also
References
Further reading
External links
- Bicchieri, Cristina; Muldoon, Ryan. "Social norms". In Zalta, Edward N. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments