Module 3.

Unfolding the Social Self

Unit 1. The Cultural Self
This unit introduces you the journey of understanding the self. This will highlight the different
factors (Social, Environmental, Biological, and other life factors) that contribute to the development of
self

Our development is largely influenced by membership to crucial social groups that shape various
aspects of our self; from our beliefs system, values orientation, and manifest behavior. Indeed, we are
born into a family and toward the end of our lives, we evaluate our self in the context of our contribution
to society, quality of our social relationships, and how we have helped touch lives of people we have
directly encountered.
At the beginning of life, we are surrounded by our family. It is the most pervading, influential
social that group that impacts our self in the entire course of development. The conceptions we hold
about our world, the values we uphold in making choices and decisions, and our habits and persistent
behavior have been formed in the context of our respective families.
Next to family, schools form a significant part of our social self. Our world perspectives go bigger
as we get exposed to more people and a formal set of standards; but this time, we are expected to meet
a certain criteria of achievement and oftentimes, in collaborative learning conditions. We harness our
knowledge that we get from our mentors and apply the socialization skills we got from our families in
developing relationships with our school peers. The information we glean from books, lectures of our
mentors, insights from our classmates are assimilated and imbibed consequently in the inner recesses of
our self.
Aside from one’s family and school, our communities also shape our social self to a large extent.
From an anthropological and sociological perspective, our cultural beliefs and practices are influenced by
what our communities and societies dictate. Values such as faith in God, respect for the elderly, task
persistence & dedication, and love for our country are often the products of communal settings we belong
to and societal expectations imposed on us.

Bio ecological Systems Theory (Urie Bronfenbrenner, 1935)

The latest model of Bronfenbrenner’s Bio Ecological Systems of Development explains an
individual’s social development, using biological, environmental, and ecological lenses. The theory
explains the bidirectional influence of individual and systems to each other and posits five specific systems
that shape an individual’s progress.

Microsystem
It refers to institutions and social groups that the individual has direct contact and interaction
with, including families, peers, schools, religious institutions, and the immediate neighborhood.
Mesosystem
This system refers to the interconnections among aspects of the microsystems that impact on the
individual concerned. Pragmatic examples of this would include parent-teacher relationships (PTA),
parent and peers connections, family and parish relations, and the like. The focus of the relationship is to
the individual, as a family member and as a student.
Exosystem
This system focuses on a social setting that an individual has no direct interaction within but
nevertheless affects their development. An example of this could be the work setting of the parentsa; a
major company decision that results to the loss of job of either parent will have a significant impact to the
child.
Macrosystem
This system encompasses the larger cultural context in which the individual resides in. Cultural
contexts may include the socioeconomic status of his country, issues of ethnicity, societal values
embraced by social institutions, cultural beliefs and practices handed down from generation to
generation, and media content.
Chronosystem
The latest system of Bronfenbrenner’s theory focuses on patterns of environmental events,
including sociohistorical events from a specific to a larger context. Graduation from college would entail
changes in the social self as the individual is expected to work and contribute to family and society at
large. Social events such as political rallies, elections, and other of a similar nature would also influence
the social self in a very vital way.

Individualism-Collectivism Model (Hazel Rose Markus & Shinobu Kitayama, 1991)

This model is used to explain large amounts of variation seen in human behavior, social
interaction, and personality. This theory further explains the differences in people and/or groups. But the
question is how?
One of the controversies in the study of culture is the dichotomy known as the West vs. Rest.
Based on the study of Markus and Kitayama (1999), people from the west have this individualistic
(independent) culture. In this culture, people tend to give higher value on the needs and accomplishments
of the individual rather than the group (e.g. United States).
But this does not mean that these people are “selfish”. It only means that individual
accomplishments or achievements matter to them most. In other words, their growth is focused on the
improvement of themselves.

Looking at the table, you may say that you have some traits that belong to the individualistic
culture, and you may also have some traits that belong to the collectivistic culture. Do not worry, this is
possible. Remember that the Philippines is the melting pot of the world, meaning to say, our culture is
influenced by different cultures as well, thus, affecting our self- construal. But one of the things to be
considered in studying this notion is that there are advantages and disadvantages in having a particular
self-construal. For instance, if you have an independent construal of the self, you may have the tendency
to be motivated by your own, hence, being too competitive.

Imagine yourself alone. Nobody is looking at you or nobody is staring. Suddenly, there’s a loud
thunder. How would you react? Maybe, some of you will scream or shout. Some of you might hide under
their bed. Others might hold on to their rosary and start saying a prayer. Now, imagine yourself in a
classroom. Your classmates are there. Your teacher is in front, giving a lesson while you are listening. All
of a sudden, a loud thunder is heard. How would you react? Well, it is possible that you will act differently.
You will, of course, consider the following: 1) your age; 2) your gender; 3) your environment (in this case,
the classroom), and; 4) the people who are present during the incident.

Unit 2. The Socio-Digital Self

This unit discusses the impact of social media platforms and other digital landscapes on self
representation. Also, the unit tackles some of the issues on interpersonal relationships in virtual
communities.

The Socio-Digital Self

With the rise of technology, our way of socializing has significantly changed. Before, when we
wish to talk to a person, we really need to approach them personally. But now, when we want to talk to
a person, whether they are near or far, they are just a social network away. One of the innovations that
improved our socialization processes is the use of social media
Digital Identity
Sociological perspectives tell that people have “role identities”. These are the characters and the
roles an individual creates as a member of a particular social position. The ‘self’, on the other hand, is the
hierarchical ordering of identities by salience. It is known that the greater the commitment on an identity
is, the greater the salience of this identity. Hence, salience of identity impacts behavioral choices in a
situation.
However, with the presence of the internet, our identity is affected. As mentioned, people tend
to separate himself from his physical body while engaged in social media, thus, disembodiment. It is
known that social media allows us to adopt identities independent from our bodies.

Online Disinhibition Effect (Suler, 2004)

When we behave differently in virtual spaces than we would in a face-to-face interactions, we
loosen up, we become less restrained and we tend to express ourselves more openly. This phenomenon
is known as online disinhibition
There are two main categories of behavior that fall under the online disinhibition effect, the
benign disinhibition and toxic disinhibition. Accordingly, the benign disinhibition includes behavior in
which people tend to self-disclose more on the internet than they would in real life. Also, they tend to go
out of their way to help someone or show kindness. On the other hand, toxic disinhibition includes
behavior that in which people tend to use rude language, threats, and visiting places of pornography,
crime, and violence on the internet. They may also go to places they might not have been to in real life.

There are six factors that cause online disinhibition, these are the following:
1. Dissociative Anonymity “You Don’t Know Me”
In virtual interactions, we can hide some or all of our identity. With this, we create a separation between
our real self and our virtual identity. By being unknown, we tend to feel protected. We can be who we
want to be and we can say whatever we want to say. By being unknown, we can display behaviors that
are not present during offline. Anonymity helps you feel less vulnerable about self-disclosing and engaging
in antisocial or harmful behavior.
2. Invisibility “You Can’t See Me”
Since many of the communications done virtually are through text, this gives us a certain type of
invisibility. The internet further gives us a special kind of shield and keeps you from being physically visible.
In virtual interactions, we cannot always be sure where or when someone is actually present. This virtual
invisibility gives us the courage to do things that we perhaps would not do otherwise. This invisibility also
lets us misrepresent ourselves. For instance, a man can represent himself as a woman, or vice versa. This
of course is impossible offline.
3. Asynchronicity “See You Later”
Whatever is happening in the cyberspace doesn’t happen in real time. This asynchronicity is also known
as the emotional hit and run (K. Munro, unpublished observations, 2003). You can post anything right now
such as personal, emotional or even political opinions. You can leave it there and go back to it again later.
Soon, you will find out how people react to your post. You can also leave the cyberworld once you are not
happy with what you see on your newsfeed. With this, you can temporarily escape the harsh things people
tend to post on social media. Also, through asynchronicity, we can think first before we react to others’
post.
4. Solipsistic Introjection “It’s all in my Head”
When we don’t know what a virtual person looks or sounds like, we tend to assign traits to those
individuals. Interactions with this introjected character feel more imaginary. In addition, when we read
another’s message, we tend to hear their voices using our own voice. We sometimes subvocalize as we
read, thus, it leads to a perception that we are talking to ourselves.
5. Dissociative Imagination “It’s All a Game”
The virtual world is in a different space entirely. This includes imaginary characters who are completely
separated from the real world. Thus, the virtual life can be viewed more as a game versus the real world
interaction. This can lead to a feeling of escapism and can make people think that they can adopt and shed
a certain character by simply logging on and off.
6. Minimized Status and Authority “Your Rules Don’t Apply Here”
Most of the time, we see and respect an authority because of their clothes, name titles, body gestures
and their environments. But in a cyberspace, we don’t see these things. Thus, we are not intimidated by
their presence online even though we know that they hold a certain position in the society. We are more
willing to speak out and misbehave without possible disapproval and punishment from authority figures.

Disinhibition and Personality

Even though there are people who exhibit online disinhibition, it should be noted that not every
person will be disinhibited in the same way or to the same level in virtual interactions. Individuals can be
predisposed to being more disinhibited based on personality. The intensity of a person’s underlying
feelings, needs, drives and the likes affect susceptibility to online disinhibition as well.
Even though not all online disinhibitions are bad, it is better and safer for us to create a digital
footprint that is worth looking at. The following are some ways to manage our online disinhibition.

Managing Online Disinhibition

Don’t post or send anything you would be embarrassed for certain others to see.
Do be careful about over-sharing.
Don’t hang out with the “wrong crowd” online.
Don’t hang out with the “wrong crowd” offline.
Do consider your emotional state before virtually posting or responding to anything.
Do consider the reaction individuals are expecting from toxic disinhibition.
Do search for yourself online.

UNIT 3. The Material/Economic Self

This unit tackles about how we maintain extensions of ourselves through our material goods and
maintenance of lifestyles, within the context of what society values as needs and wants and what do these
material goods say about ourselves and sense of self.

The Material/Economic Self

While it is true that most of the material things that we possess are not the things that we need,
it is equally true that what we have in our lives can tell other people who we really are. Our possessions,
gadgets, properties and belongings tell a lot of ourselves. These things were chosen by us because we see
ourselves in these things. The products that we purchase are the products in which we see ourselves with.
For instance, the perfume you buy and wear is the perfume you think best suits you. By knowing who we
are, we also need to know what we want. But the dilemma remains however, that our wants are not
exactly what we need. Before we proceed with the material aspect of ourselves, we have to know first
the difference between wants and needs.
Most of us confuses wants with needs. Some people think that they are just the same. However,
these two are different from each other. We have learned before that needs are the things that we cannot
live without. These include food, shelter, clothing, water, air, medical care and sex. On the other hand,
wants are things that we just like but not necessarily our needs. These include a new cellphone, a new
car, jewelries and the likes. Regardless whether the things that we have are needs or wants, we should
always remember that these things tell something about ourselves.

The Meaning of Things (Mihaly Csiksentmihalyi)

Unknown to some, the things that we use, own, and surround ourselves with might accurately
reflect our personality. Needless to say, the clothes that we wear, the car that we drive and the furnishings
of our home, are all expressions of ourselves, even when they act as disguises rather than as reflections.
It only means to say that the things that surround us are inseparable from who we are. In other words,
objects or things are intimately related to the self.
It is also tantamount to say that whatever material things we are having in our lives are product
of our choices. This only means that the things and the product that we purchase tell a lot of stories about
ourselves.
Accordingly, the material environment that surrounds us is rarely neutral. It can either make our
lives very chaotic in a sense that it is too random and disorganized, or it helps us to give purpose and
direction to our lives. These only prove that the material things that we have are connected to who we
are now.

Utility and Significance in Everyday Objects (John Heskett)

Aside from the association of the self and the material things that we have, we should also know the
function and significance of the things that we have for ourselves. It is not enough that we know that we
have a connection with our material things. It is also important to know their uses. For Heskett, there are
two important things that we need to know with our material things. These are:
• Utility. This is concerned with how things work and serve a practical purpose. This is also
concerned with efficiency derived from technological and material factors. (e.g., kitchen knife- a
primary utility used as a cutting tool).
• Significance. This is concerned with how forms assume meaning in the ways they are used, or the
roles and meaning assigned to them. It is also concerned with how objects become powerful
symbols or icons of habit and ritual. As per Haskett, this can be quite separate to their function.
 (e.g., necklace- its function is to beautify the neck, but is significant to a person who holds a
position in the society).
• Significance, in contrast to efficiency, has more to do with expression and meaning. However,
meanings are often culturally determined. For some, even the smallest utilitarian objects are
capable of embodying values.

Semiotics: Objects as ‘signs’ (Roland Barthes)

To further understand the term significance, Roland Barthes helped in further understanding our
material possession through semiotics. Roland Barthes who is a French critical theorist, was one of the
first to observe the relationship between the people and their objects. According to him, the objects that
we have could be decoded in order to convey subliminal messages.
During the 1950’s, Barthes popularized the field of semiology or the study of objects as signs through
a number of newspaper articles that read everyday objects and practices. In 1957, these were collated
into his book entitled Mythologies.

One of the contents in the book Mythologies is about the new (in 1950s) Citroen DS:
The new Citroen was a car with sleek lines that was technologically advanced for its time. This was
compared by advertisers to something spiritual or magical. The name ‘DS’ came from the French word
‘deesse’ which means goddess. It was deliberate on the part of the manufacturers because they wanted
to perpetuate the idea of the car as an ‘otherworldly’ object.

In this analysis, it was obvious that the object (the car) and its ‘other’ meaning were unpacked. This
analysis is simply called semiotics. For Barthes, objects are not just things but are reflections of the wider
lives of communities and individuals.
All these suggests that objects act as a complex systems of signs which allow us to read meaning into
people, places and purposes.

According to Barthes, a sign has 2 elements:

• Signifier (its physical form - a diamond ring)
• Signified (the mental concept it refers to - engaged to be married)

Barthes claimed that all things, verbal or visual, could be viewed as a kind of speech or ‘language’. It
is then tantamount to say that objects can speak, and that even the most ordinary object might be
eloquent.
For example, clothes may have a simple functional meaning such as to cover and protect the body.
However, this is also doubled up as signs. These jeans may construct a meaning and carry a message,
which as a member of a culture, we can understand.