By means of self-categorization and membership of a group, people cultivate a social identity that functions as a social-cognitive scheme (customs, standards and attitudes) for their group associated action. The tendency is for the perceiver to consider these attributes as vital to his or her own personality and thus use these attributes to label others (Hoffman Harburg, & Maier, 2014). Some vital end results of social identity and self categorization include stereotyping, prejudice and conflict (Tajfe & Turner, 2004). That is, as the identity groups engage in in-group, the out-group members are likely to be discriminated. The formation of sub-groups (“us” versus “them”) within an organization due to demographics diversity may pose
When speaking about racism, we need to understand how it is socially constructed. Ones status in society plays a role in social categorization which allows us to conclude that categorization is a social construct. McLeod, S states that “social identity is a person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s)” (McLeod, SA. 2008). All people are looking for in this social world is to find a place where they belong.
Using a culture-specific lense allows us to account for the ways in which situated meanings of face and facework may differ based upon one culture to the next. Cultural values shape our meanings and help construct the intricacies that create our social self (“public self”) and personal self (“private self”)--both of which are inextricably linked to face. While face is fundamentally a social self construction issue, we can still use this phenomenon to better understand conflict behavior because face will always influence and determine the ways in which we handle conflict (Ting-Toomey and Kurogi). More specifically, we can better understand intercultural conflict, which often arises due to different cultural values and conflict assumptions. Our goal is to explore facework and politeness as it relates to intercultural conflict, particularly when a racial slur is used in an intercultural
The concept and specifics of social justice are open to interpretation. Each theory has its advantages and flaws, making it difficult to settle on one set of guidelines that would be deemed universally as “just.” Some key issues that social justice theories should address are whether or not social justice depends on equality or aid to those in greater need, how possible is it to remove bias from a social situation, whether or not a society should be working towards a better or a perfect society, and what part does plural grounding play in the process of seeking justice? One pressing issue that social justice theories should address is whether or not justice is about equal access to equal treatment and resources or providing more aid to those
For example, acculturating groups and individuals may often feel like they are being discriminated against by the members of the dominant culture (Berry, 1995, 2005). Such perceived discrimination is one of the predictors of acculturative stress (Torres, Driscoll, & Voell, 2012), as well as one of the predictors of social anxiety among different ethnic groups (Levine et al., 2014). In fact, Fang et al. (2016) found that those who reported higher levels of social anxiety also reported higher levels of perceived discrimination. It is plausible that perceived discrimination and other social difficulties first led to acculturative stress, which in turn could explain the higher levels of social anxiety among these individuals.
1. The two sociological perspectives that I will be writing about are conflict theory and symbolic interactionism. There are two conflict theories of a social problem Marxist Conflict theory and Non-Marxist Conflict theory. The importance of using social perspective when studying the Marxist and Non-Marxist conflict theories allows individuals a better understanding of the conflicts we face in average life such as class inequality, alienation, and conflicts in competing values in social groups. As for symbolic interactionism, a social problem is created through social interaction from definitions and labels individuals place on particular things.
This is crucial for Weber as his theory focuses on the impossibility for objectivity in the social sciences. Understanding ideal types is an extension to his premise that social science research is subjective. Ideal types are a subjective concept that an individual conceptualizes in their mind. Understanding the role of subjectivities in the social sciences has helped me understand the flexibility of sociological terms-- or ideal types. For example, I can understand that the concepts explaining the disparity in academic performance between students of colors and white students should be used as a ruler to put against reality and see how it compares.
Abstract This research work is a generalization of the investigated data and sources of the problem of stereotypes and prejudice towards people from different countries and nationalities. The primary objective of this study is to define the terms "stereotype" and "prejudice" for a better understanding of the problems arising in the communication and interaction between people. To demonstrate, as the examples in this paper will be presented to the main models of stereotypes that have developed in people's thinking during the existence of mankind as a whole. It is also worth noting that stereotypical thinking often leads to multiple problems in communication and life, for example: to work in an international environment, and
When society as a whole refuses to see people as a unique and instead forces them to fit into a stereotypical mold, humanity dehumanizes itself and becomes unable to recognize individual genius. James R. Moore, the author of “Shattering Stereotypes: A Lesson Plan for Improving Student Attitudes and Behavior toward Minority Groups” expresses this issue: “Walter Lippmann, who introduced the term stereotype into the American vocabulary, stated ‘for the most part we do not first see, and then define, we define first and then see’” (Moore 36). Because of the complexity of stereotypes, they materialize in day-to-day life much more often than expected, and their negative effects produce more harm than commonly comprehended. Joshua Aronson of New York University sums up this concept by stating that “human intellectual performance is far more fragile than we customarily think; it can rise and fall depending on the social context” (16). Since stereotypes create misconceptions of opposing groups while restricting an individual’s own capacity, educating society about these stereotypes should be a high priority to counteract their negative
Moreover, human rights as mentioned by Karlsen & Nazroo (2002) are poorly undertaken and considered by the ones that are working for this justice system. Support measures for justice can works as the human rights realisation from suitable approaches, like addressing and discriminating the vulnerabilities and problems that are faced by socially excluded target population. Development of wide political coalitions and information regarding local frameworks in establishment of the reforms are vital for disabling resistance. It is important for the state according to Sen (2000) to work for handling discrimination and social exclusion prevailing within the society along with promoting “social equity” in relation to human rights responsibilities and breaking the brutal circle for the betterment of each and every citizen of the state. The three minority group to be taken under consideration within our discussion includes Women, LGBT and people with