Question

What is the general difference between sociological theories of socialization and psychological theories of socialization? explain the looking glass self and how it relates to symbolic interactionism? and why "significant others" and "generalized others" by Mead are important to differentiate in the process of children's socialization? those questions are for my sociology class.

Answer 1

What is the general difference between sociological theories of socialization and psychological theories of socialization?

Psychological and Sociological Theories of Socialization

Theories Of Socialization

When we are born, we have a genetic makeup and biological traits. However, who we are as human beingsour identity–develops through social interaction. Many scholars, both in the fields of psychology and in sociology, have described the process of self-development as a precursor to understanding how that “self” becomes socialized.

Both psychologists and sociologists have theories about socialization and the influences that make you you. The two disciplines differ, however, in that psychological theories tend to focus on internal processes and the mind, while sociologists focus on external influences, interactions, and society.

Psychological Theories of Socialization	Sociological Theories of Socialization
Focus is how the mind influences human behavior	Focus is the role of society in shaping behavior
Psychologists tend to look inward (mental health, emotional processes) to understand human behavior	Sociologists tend to look outward (social institutions, cultural norms, interactions with others) to understand human behavior
Key psychological contributions by Sigmund Freud	Key sociological contributions by George Herbert Mead

Explain the looking glass self and how it relates to symbolic interactionism

Charles Horton Cooley , symbolic interactionist, explained how parents help children develop the ability to interact with others with his famous concept of the looking-glass self. This is the idea that as human we develop a self image that reflects how others see and respond to us. We imagine how we appear to others and how they evaluate our appearance. Based on that, we develop some sort of self feeling, such as pride or embrassment. Because children's earliest interactions are typically with thier parents, it is that interaction that is most important in the formation of self image. This helps explain why feral children and others who spend their formative years in prolonged social isolation are unlikely to from a fully developed self image. there are no others to respond to them It is as we interact with others, especially when we are young, that we develop sense of our selves.

Why "significant others" and "generalized others" by Mead are important to differentiate in the process of children's socialization

George Herbert Mead (1863–1931), American philosopher and social theorist, considered by many to be the father of the school of Symbolic Interactionism in sociology and social psychology, although he did not use this nomenclature.

Mead emphasized the particularly human use of language and other symbols to convey meaning. Knowing others' intentions requires imagining the situation from their perspectives. Mead believed that social experience depends on our seeing ourselves as others do, or, as he coined it, “taking the role of the other.”

For Mead, if we were simply to take the roles of others, we would never develop selves or self-consciousness. We would have a nascent form of self-consciousness that parallels the sort of reflexive awareness that is required for the use of significant symbols. A role-taking (self) consciousness of this sort makes possible what might be called a proto-self, but not a self, because it doesn't have the complexity necessary to give rise to a self. How then does a self arise? Here Mead introduces his well-known neologism, the generalized other. When children or adults take roles, they can be said to be playing these roles in dyads. However, this sort of exchange is quite different from the more complex sets of behaviors that are required to participate in games. In the latter, we are required to learn not only the responses of specific others, but behaviors associated with every position on the field. These can be internalized, and when we succeed in doing so we come to “view” our own behaviors from the perspective of the game as a whole, which is a system of organized actions.

The organized community or social group which gives to the individual his unity of self may be called “the generalized other.” The attitude of the generalized other is the attitude of the whole community. Thus, for example, in the case of such a social group as a ball team, the team is the generalized other in so far as it enters—as an organized process or social activity—into the experience of any one of the individual members of it.