Kevin Mawardi

Ms. Katie Coleman

SOC001

Nature vs. Nurture Assignment

1. Nature and Nurture: What is nature/nurture? Also, discuss the influence of socialization in
explaining the process of ones personality and intellectual development. Provide
examples.

Nature and nurture refers to the debate over the biological versus social influences in
socialization (Socialization 4). Basically, it seeks to answer if an individual is born a certain
way or if he or she learns to become that way. The debate attempts to determine the extent of
heritability, or the proportion of our personality, self, and biological traits which stem from
genetic factors (Socialization 4).

Though it is widely accepted that the mix of both biological and social influences affect the
individual, each side of the debate provides their own compelling arguments. Those
advocating the impact of nature often cite studies done on identical twins. The central
premise of the study involves raising identical twins apart from each other. Since identical
twins share genetics, researchers will be able to determine the degree that our temperaments,
preferences, and abilities are shaped by our genetic makeup versus our social environment
(Nature versus Nurture, Socialization SoftChalk Lesson). The Schein-Bernstein study
presented two identical twins, Elyse Schein and Paula Bernstein, which were raised apart and
then subsequently reunited at the age of 35. Upon meeting for the first time, each was
surprised at how similar they were in both appearance and behavior. As such, the study
points to genetics and nature as the root of our behavior.

By contrast, the nurture perspective can be summed up via the Blank Slate or Tabula Rasa
Theory, which states humans are born with no mental or intellectual capacities and all that
they learn is written upon them by those who provide their primary and secondary
socialization (Socialization 3). In laymans terms, we are solely the product of our social
environment. Nurture advocates often point to the studies of feral children to support their
claim. Though this does not definitively sway the debate to one side or the other, the absence
of standard humanity in feral children implies that humanity itself is a learned trait and not
something innate.
The study of feral children also speaks volumes as to the importance of socialization. The
case(s) of Anna and Isabelle are testament to this. Both were feral children, being that they
lacked the typical socialization influences. However, while Isabelle was at least in the
presence of an agent of socialization - her deaf-mute mother Anna lived her life in a
constant near-death state and was kept completely isolated in an attic. Upon discovering
them and subjecting them to a process of re-socialization, they found that Anna could only
learn a few basic life skills. Anna would pass at the age of 10 while Isabelle quickly learned
all basic skills and was later able to attend school. The deciding factor was simply Isabelles
exposure to an agent of socialization, albeit in an uncommon form. Thus, this suggests that
socialization will not only cultivate a personality in line with those of society but will
positively affect intelligence as well (or at least the capacity to grasp concepts).


2. What is the self? According to Charles Horton Cooley, explain the looking glass self
(discuss the three phases). George Herbert Mead also discusses the stages of the self:
identify differences between I and Me. What is meant by significant others? How are
significant others related to the self? Identify Meads three-stage process of self-
development.

There have been numerous iterations of the term self, however it most commonly refers to
the core of your personality, representing your conscious experience of having a separate
and unique identity (Socialization 4). Sociologist Charles Horton Cooley viewed the self as
a looking glass, a three-stage process that each individual undertakes to develop his or her
self. The stages are as follows:

1. We imagine how our actions might appear to others.
2. We interpret how people judge our actions.
3. We make a self-judgment based on the presumed judgments of others.

Clearly, the phases reflect the notion that others become our looking glass or mirror and the
self seems to be the cumulative total of the perceived judgments of others. To reiterate the
process, we first consider our actions from the perspective of others. Then, we reflect on our
actions based on those perspectives before finally appraising ourselves via the judgments of
others. This essentially creates our personal concept of the self. In each phase, the active
property in the creation of the self relies on somebody other than the self. In many ways, the
self seems to be the product of other selves; a self-image created through how we think
others see us.

Another noted sociologist, George Herbert Mead, also discusses the self and segments it into
two different parts: the I and the Me. The I bears slight resemblance to Freuds primal
id, being that it is the part of our self that seeks freedom of expression and from others
activity, and spontaneity. In addition, the I wishes to take initiative of any given situation
and is the unique and distinctive part of the individual. The Me however, is the socialized
part of our self, regulating the behavior of the I through things learned via the agents of
socialization (family, friends, etc.).

Another component of Meads theory discusses the concepts of significant others and
generalized others. Significant others are other people whose evaluations of the individual
are important and regularly considered during interactions (Socialization 7). Basically,
significant others are primary agents of socialization or those individuals that have had the
most effect in influencing a self. In terms of Meads concept of the self, significant others
directly influence the Me and thus, regulate the I. Significant others socialize the self and
provide lessons that are in turn used by the Me to regulate the I.

Lastly, though socialization itself is a lifelong process, there exist three markers or distinct
stages of development. The first stage, primary socialization, begins at birth and lasts until
the school years. Primary socialization includes all the ways the newborn is molded into a
social being capable of interacting in and meeting expectations of society (Socialization 2).
Though agents at this level primarily include parents/family, it seems the media has become
more and more prevalent. The next stage, secondary socialization, begins in later childhood
up until adolescence. In this stage, children will often come under the sway of non-family
figures or institutions, most commonly friends and school, respectively. It seems that the
socialization in this stage will have a more lasting impact in terms of later social behavior.
Some individuals may even experience anomie (a lack of usual social standards) later in life
due to the socialization they experienced in high school. The final stage of socialization is
called adult socialization and occurs as we assume adult roles. These are typically the
unique roles encountered during college, marriage, employment, and so forth; roles that we
would have otherwise be unexposed to.
3. Explain the dramaturgical approach. What occurs on front-stage? What happens in
backstage? How can Erving Goffmans idea of impression management and face-
work be used to understand social behavior?

Dramaturgy is an approach based in symbolic-interactionism and consists of assumptions of
how individuals manage others impressions of themselves (Socialization 9). Created by
Erving Goffman, the dramaturgical approach likens and analogizes individuals to be actors in
a play (note the prefix drama). Like any actor, the goal is to gain the acceptance of the
audience and be viewed in the way that the actor intends. Goffman identifies the front-
stage and the back-stage as two components of the approach. The front stage is the
individuals outward appearance; what is presented to the audience, what they see. The
backstage is a place where all the support activities necessary to maintain the performance
on the main stage will go on (Socialization 9). Goffmans backstage is essentially where
an individual can be their true self, free from playing the role or upholding the appearance
they project to the audience. The front stage, however, requires the actor or individual to vary
their performance based on the audience and thus, it follows that we have several guises
dependent on our audience and whom we interact.

In terms of analyzing social behavior, Goffmans dramaturgy provides us with an explanation
regarding the appearances of individuals and why they dress the way they do. Ultimately, the
process gives us insight regarding the role of appearance in maintaining society in terms of
social order and authority (ie. the clothing example given in the resource).

4. Identify the agents of socialization. What is the role of schools in gender role socialization?
How has technology (computer, cell phone, email, & TV) influenced the socialization
process?

Agents of socialization refer strictly to the people involved in our socialization. This clearly
varies but the most common agents include parents, friends, teachers, and so on. Most agents
are those individuals present during the first two stages of socialization (primary and
secondary). That is not to say that agents cannot appear later in life however. As we reach
the adult stage, we may take on other individuals to emulate as role models and adapt to
newer roles (ie. husband, wife, parent, etc.). But generally speaking, the agents or individuals
present in our early life do most of the socialization.

Organizations involved in our socialization are referred to as agencies of socialization. These
include the family, religion, schools, and so forth. Arguably, the family and school as social
institutions are the most effectual agencies of socialization, just by virtue of exposure. An
offshoot regarding agents of socialization is the presence of total institutions. These refer to
institutions that have near-total control of all aspects of its members lives and all aspects of
the individuals life are controlled by those in authority in the institution (Socialization 7).
The strongest examples of this include the military and prisons. In these institutions,
individuals are re-socialized and conform to the norms and standards within that select
society (ie. military society/culture).

In referral to the prompt, schools affect the development and socialization of gender roles to a
considerable extent. Though we may be in a more progressive era, schools still implicitly
reinforce the commonly accepted gender roles. It is largely through the social interactions in
school that we are able to receive either positive or negative responses on gender-related
behavior. Namely we learn what is considered conventionally manly and womanly.
Generally, the more adjusted an individual is to school culture or the more they fit in, the
more masculine or feminine gender roles they have conformed to. Male children that are
deemed popular often conform to the golden age ideal of the man (well-muscled and
athletic). Likewise, females that are popular conform to the stereotype of the idealized
woman, with the beauty products to boot. Outlier behavior or actions that have not been
conventionally established or accepted are subliminally rejected. Ie. It seems intelligent, non-
athletic males are less accepted that their less intelligent, athletic counterparts. Though these
are mostly encountered in high school, the presence of these roles also occurs during
secondary socialization - where the need to belong with peers is strongest. In fact, some
studies have addressed that even teachers have enforced some gender roles cum stereotypes
1
.
In this respect, schools assume quite a lasting impact in socializing individuals on gender
roles, for better and for worse.

In this digital age, technology has become a prominent agent of socialization. To my chagrin,
technology has become too much of a reliance, especially in the process of socializing
children. Too often have I seen technology (ie. iPad) become the babysitter and a surrogate
parent, given to children to occupy them albeit temporarily. The presence of technology at
such an early age builds a dependence on it and could be a chief cause of the generational
divide. Children have become glued to their devices and seem to be much more influenced
by the things they see on the Internet usually for worse than filial interaction. To continue
with such behavior, would be akin to relegating the family to somewhat of a placeholder in
the socialization process. In fact, peers may be more influential as agents simply because
they share the same technological upbringing. In this respect, technology has become a
double-edged sword to the socialization process. Technology itself is an excellent conduit for
socialization, potentially accelerating the socialization process, but only when used correctly
and in tandem with other agents of socialization. When used as a momentary babysitter,
technology eliminates vital agents of socialization and detaches individuals from physical
society.





1
http://www.education.com/reference/article/gender-role-stereotyping/