LEARNING

MODULE
UNDERSTANDING THE SELF COLLEGE

THE SOCIOLOGICAL
PERSPECTIVE OF
THE SELF
 LEON GUINTO MEMORIAL COLLEGE, Inc
443 Mabini Street, Zone II, Atimonan, Quezon
(Recognized by the Government)
Q1W2
No. 010 s. 1986

…teaching minds …changing lives …moving forward

Name: Learning Area:
Grade and Section: Date Deployed:
Date Returned:

THE SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE OF THE SELF

I. LEARNING COMPETENCIES

At the end of the chapter, students are expected to:

A
 Understand the multiple systematic factors that shape and are shaped by the developing
self.

OVERVIEW (Optional)
No one is born hating another person because of the color of skin or background or religion. People learn
to hate, and if they learn to hate, then they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the
human heart than its opposite. (Nelson Mandela)

DISCUSSION
EXPLORE
Bioecological Systems Perspectives to Understanding the Self
Any phenomena about human behavior must be understood in the light of an existing theoretical
framework. The very purpose of a theory is to find possible relationships or connections between or
among a number of underlying mental construct. We cannot dismiss the idea that any theory of the mind
is a representation of reality. It is a characteristic of a good theory that it must be parsimonious in
explaining phenomena about the self, capable of making accurate prediction, and testing hypothesis for
further scientific investigation (1.2 – Hermans (2015) – Human Development in Today’s Globalizing
World.pdf,” n.d.)
Interdependence and Reciprocity
An individual can only be understood in the context of his or her environment; elements are
interdependent, reciprocally related. The “environment” is phenomenologically experienced (Alampay,
2018). Our behavior is fundamentally determined and reactive to the situation that we are in either it be
socially and environmentally. Interdependence and reciprocity means that we share the need for co-
existence, and in that we need our physical environment such as a place to live, a thing to eat, and
something to wear. On the one hand, we share our talent to others for mutual protection and benefit.
Urie Bronfenbrenner Bioecological Systems
One who understands well Bronfenbrenner Bioecological Systems can accept without arguing that his
theory: Ecology of Human Development (1979) is a complex system. However, Bronfenbrenner (1989-
1999) argued that the 1979 version of his theory was revised, refined, and extended. When we say that it
is a complex system, it can be said that it is comprised or mutually overlapping subsystems. These
systems interact in a dynamic processes, transactions, and interaction. This can be understood further in
the Process-Person-Context-Time Model (PPCT). The first idea in this model refers to the Proximal
Process, which can be defined here as:
2|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
Human development takes place through processes of progressively more complex reciprocal interaction
between an active, evolving, biopsychological human organism and the persons, objects, and symbols in
its immediate external environment. To be effective, the interaction must occur on a fairly regular basic
over extended periods of time. Such enduring forms of interaction in the immediate environment are
referred to as proximal processes. (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998, p. 996, italics in the original).
Second to this model is the idea of Person, which refers to the idea of demand, resource and force. The
idea of demand pertains to the personal characteristics of the person such as gender, age, race, etc. that
may influence interactions because of expectations. The resource pertains to the mental, emotional, and
material capability and opportunities, or even the inadequacy of the aforementioned. This can be in the
form of intelligence, skills, education, and family life. The force on the other hand, refers to the inherent
differences in temperament, motivation, drive, and persistence.

FIRM UP
Subsystem of Bronfenbrenner Ecological Systems

Urie Bronfenbrenner (1979) contributed to the ideas of the context systems: Microsystem, Mesosystem,
Exosystem, and Macrosysttem. The Microsystem refers to the patterns of activities and interaction
experienced by the individual’s immediate setting. The interactions occur from parent to child, and from
child to teacher vis-à-vis as the main character of this interaction. In these activities and interactions, we
can say that the proximal processes are said to occur. The second subsystem is the Mesosystem that
refers to the interrelations of parent-teacher, work and home environment. In this subsystem, the child’s
environment is expanding, and how the relationship may bring a change in behavior in the way the parent,
teacher, and student interact with each other reciprocally. While the Exosystem refers to social structure,
which may have direct influence on the behavior of the individual such as school administration and
parent’s workplace. The Macrosystem on the other hand, refers to the influence of culture,
socioeconomic standing, religion, government regulations and enactment of laws. This wired social
connections have significant effect on the individual behavior as a member of society subject to the
dominions of one’s culture, economic status, and government policies (Tudge, Mokrova, Hatfield, &
Karnik, 2009).
In Corollary to the subsystems, the Chronosystems however, entails the transition over the course of
historical time and sociohistorical events. This life transition is inevitable, and this could be the impact of

3|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

information technology, historical events, culture, and economic status, which transpired across
microtime and macrotime.
It is inherent upon human nature to change, and this change may produce perturbation to the system in
place, and producing self-disequilibrium. The role of the system is to maintain equilibrium or
homeostasis, The system effectively works in an adaptive mechanism for self-organization by
establishing patterns and rules of behavior in relation with and with respect to the environment.
Globalizing World: Implications to Self and identity
It is intriguing to pose an inquiry about the self in two ways: are
we what we are because of wo we are? Or there are forces and
events shaping who we are? We may also continue to ask and
sustain our inquiry that if the latter is in fact true, what are these
events and forces, and how strong are these forces in influencing
the development of the self? It is good to reflect on these things
for a while, and leave ourselves to think for the answers. But
our philosophical thinking may not suffice, unless we lay down
empirical answers to these questions.

The Self in a Compressing World

In the era of globalization, it is true to say that despite of improving international relations among
countries, it is observed that the self is living in a self-compressing world. There are clear demarcation
and border between countries of different race and nationality. Individuals are separating from each other
based on interest and creating demarcation line based on race and identity. Can we not dream of the
world opening its borders from different countries and communities?
Culture Shapes Individual Mindset
Rokeach’s (1960) has the classic study Open and Close Mind, wherein scholars have unfolded in
response to the border crossing in globalizing world, individuals and groups are opening and closing the
doors based on their needs, interests, wishes, anxieties, or uncertainties. Mead (1934) stated the
assumption that society and the self are not mutually exclusive, but rather inclusive as mead argued in his
book Mind, Self and Society. The dialogical theory (Hermans & Geiser, 2012; Hermans & Hermans;
Konopka, 2010) in this theory, the self is considered as the society of mind which functions as a dynamic
multiplicity of embodied I-positions among which dialogical relationships can be established. Innovation
and renewal of self and identity are indispensable for further development of the self. Renewal of self
renews society (with the self being part of society and society being made up of many selves). The main
requirement for innovation and renewal is openness to each other among individuals, groups, and
countries. Openness will bring us to the social positions of other groups, cultures, and communities as
part of a globalizing society, and for the development of demarcated self of individual person.

ACTIVITY
DEEPENING
Self and Identity as Sociocultural and Sociohistorical Phenomena: The Impact of Globalization

It makes sense to say that the self and society are shaping each other in a continual
process. The society penetrating the self, and self is introducing innovation, and social
change. According
According
to Hermans and Hermans-Konopka (2010) globalization can be liken to Janus-faced – a face to the right
4|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
leading to creativity and innovation of self and identity, and the left face leading to identity confusion and
marginalization. We can define globalization as a process by which cultures influence each other through
channels such as trade, immigration, and the exchange of information via mass media and technologies
(Hermans, 2010). A compelling example of globalization, which violates social mores and traditions are
given by Jensen, Arnett, and Mckenzie, (2011) the popularity of internet connectivity has given young
adults freedom in Chile to organize sexual parties, which tend to violate customary sexual behavior, and
violated traditional and sexual mores. In China, the emergence of factory girls in their early teens moving
from rural areas to cities in an attempt to find work, attending English classes, others became escorts to
businessmen. Many of them are working in order to send hard earn money back to their families.
Internet Implication to Self and identity
The use of internet has become revolutionary in the process of globalization. It has the capacity to
broaden one’s vision even without leaving the comfort of one’s home. The internet nowadays are
accessible in any locations: in schools, workplace, train station, or even at home. The internet has
allowed users to have access to unlimited type of information. Larson (2002) concluded in his review of
related studies that the freedom of choice and empowerment provided by the internet in the lives of
adolescents as their social mode of communications and digital connectivity. These digital connections
can be in the form of establishing friendship, romantic partners, their health and well-being, their
education, their civic and community engagement. Larson further added the downside of internet as it
uncovers vulnerabilities to interpersonal manipulation and exploitation, and it opens opportunities for
deviant behavior such as hacking and accessing diversity of pornographic materials (see also Hevern,
2012). A good example of this phenomenon.
“Central to our recent culture have been the increased pace of social change and the growing
pervasiveness of ambiguous and discordant customs to which children are expected to subscribe. Under
the cumulative impact of rapid industrialization, immigration, urbanization, mobility, technology, and
mass communication, there has been a steady erosion of traditional values and standards. Instead of a
simple and coherent body of practices and beliefs, children find themselves confronted with constantly
shifting styles and increasingly questioned norms whose durability is uncertain and precarious. Few
times in history have so many children faced the tasks of life without the aid of accepted and durable
traditions. Not only does the strain of making choices standards and goals beset them at every turn, but
these competing beliefs and divergent demands prevent them from developing either internal stability or
external consistency (Millon, Lerner, & Weiner, 2005),(p. 363).
Individualism and Collectivism
Individualism and collectivism are conceptualized as syndromes of beliefs and attitudes that distinguish
different cultural populations. Collectivism is seen as encompassing such core ideas as an emphasis on
the views, needs, and goals of one’s in-group as having priority over one’s own personal views, needs,
and goals, and a readiness to cooperate with the in-group members. In contrast, individualism is seen as
entailing such core ideas as that of individuals as ends to themselves who should realize their own selves
and cultivate their own judgment. In collectivist cultures, in-groups are assumed to influence a broad
range of behaviors, with individuals experiencing pressure to conform to in-group norms or leave the
groups. In contrast, in individualistic cultures, in-groups are see3n as providing only limited norms, with
individuals readily able to enter and exit in-groups. The relationship of individuals with their in-groups is
of limited intensity (Millon et al., 2005).

The Looking Glass Self and the Theory of Inter-personalism

Harry Stuck Sullivan and Charles Cooley (1902) propounded a view that the
5|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
way we relate with other people is determined by the quality of interaction we
to the active side of the self, it acts with autonomy and free will, that will determine one’s personality.
The “me on the other hand, is the physical characteristics as well as psychological capabilities that makes
who you are.

ASSESSMENT
TRANSFER

MULTIPLE CHOICE
_____ 1. He introduced the concept “Looking Glass Self”.
A. George Mead B. Charles Cooley C. Gerry Lanuza D. Jean Baudrillard
_____ 2. He proposed the theory of social self.
A. George Mead B. Charles Cooley C. Gerry Lanuza D. Jean Baudrillard
_____ 3. During this stage, there is no self.
A. Game stage B. Play stage C. Preparatory stage D. Role playing
_____ 4. During this stage, the self is developing.
A. Game stage B. Play stage C. Preparatory stage D. Role playing
_____ 5. The attitudes, viewpoints, demands, and expectations of others and the society.
A. Role taking B. Role Playing C. Generalized others D. Looking glass
self
_____ 6. It refers to that complex whole which include knowledge, belief, art, moral, law, customs, and
in any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.
A. Identity toolbox B. Social identity C. Society D. Culture
_____ 7. According to view, there is not intrinsic self that can possess the enduring qualities.
A. Androcentric B. Egocentric C. Sociocentric D. Polycentric
_____ 8. This refers to the features of a person’s identity that he or she chooses to emphasize in
constructing his or her social self.
A. Personal name B. Social identity C. Identity toolbox D. cultural construction of the
self
_____ 9. It is a universal practice numerous cross-cultural variations and establishes a child’s birthright
and social identity.
A. Personal name B. Rites of passage C. Identity toolbox D. Incorporation
_____ 10. These are interactions in which there is discrepancy between the identity a person claims to
possess and the identity attributed to that person by others.
A. Illusion of wholeness B. Identity struggles C. Rites of passage D. Separation
_____ 11. According to Mead, the self has two divisions:
A. I and others B. I and society C. I and Me D. I and You
_____ 12. The looking glass self is a concept introduced by
A. Cooley B. Mead C. Lanuza D. Baudrillard

6|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

_____ 13. According to this person, self-identity is continuously changing due to the demand of
multitude of social context, information, technology.
A. Cooley B. Mead C. Lanuza D. Baudrillard
_____ 14. This refers to the view of the self which is contingent upon a situation.
A. Egocentric B. Sociocentric C. Monocentric D. Polycentric
_____ 15. This is experienced by individuals when there is a discrepancy between person’s assumed
identity and the identity imposed by others and the society.
A. Identity crisis B. Identity struggles C. Identity problems D. Identity illusion
RESPONDING TO CHANGE
How do you feel about change? When you are being asked to change, mark where you fall on the
continuum between the descriptions:
1 2 3 4 5
bad good
annoyed excited
depressed enthused
anxious calm
tired energized
disinterested interested
discouraged optimistic
overwhelmed challenged
Do you typically embrace or resist change? Explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
CHANGES IN OUR LIVES
Think about an important change you made in your life.
1. Describe the change
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
2. What were you thinking going through the change?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
3. How were you feeling before, during, and after you made the change?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

FEEDBACK

How did you find the lesson? Were you able to discover your true self?

7|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

 RESOURCES
UNDERSTANDING THE SELF
By Dr. Joseph Terell M. Malabuyo, Ms. Liezel Moises,
Ms. Ivy Marie Zarraga, Dr. Reynold Varela

UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

By Eden Joy Pastor Alata, Bernardo Nicolas Caslib, Jr.,
Janice Patria Javier Serafica, R. A. Pawilen

UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

By Salvacion L. Villafuerte, Rudjane C. Tunac and Estela L. Borja

UNDERSTANDING THE SELF

By Fraulein Bosch Silva

8|IVVILLASIN, UNDERSTANDING THE SELF