Explain and evaluate how the self and social identity are constructed through socialisation

What this dot point is asking

The TASC course states that the concepts and theories of socialisation are used to explain the construction of identity. This dot point asks you to explain how a sense of self and a social identity are built up through social interaction, not given at birth. You need the key interactionist thinkers, an account of how identity can be multiple and changing, and an evaluation of how much identity is freely chosen versus socially imposed.

Why the self is social

A newborn has no sense of self. Sociologists argue that self awareness and identity emerge only through interaction with others, which is why cases of extreme isolation, such as feral children, show a failure to develop a normal self. Identity is the sense of who we are, built from the social categories we belong to and the meanings others attach to us. Because it is learned through socialisation, identity varies across cultures and changes over a lifetime.

Mead: the I and the me

George Herbert Mead, a founder of symbolic interactionism, explained that children develop a self by learning to take the role of the other. First they imitate significant others such as parents, then through play and games they internalise the generalised other, the wider expectations of society. Mead distinguished two parts of the self: the I, the spontaneous and creative part that acts, and the me, the socialised part that reflects on how others see us. The self is the ongoing conversation between them.

Cooley and the looking-glass self

Cooley's metaphor captures how identity depends on others. If a student is consistently treated as clever, they tend to come to see themselves that way and act accordingly; if treated as a troublemaker, the reverse can happen. This links directly to labelling in the deviance topic. An Australian example is how a young athlete praised within a sporting club builds a sporting identity that becomes central to who they are.

Goffman: presenting the self

Erving Goffman used a dramaturgical analogy, treating social life as a theatre. We are all actors managing the impressions we give, performing on a front stage where we present an idealised self and relaxing in the back stage. Impression management means we actively shape our identity for different audiences. An everyday Australian example is the different self a person presents on a job interview, with friends, and on social media, each a tailored performance.

Evaluating the construction of identity

How freely is identity chosen? Interactionists emphasise agency: we negotiate and perform our identities. Structural theorists reply that the categories available to us, such as class, gender and ethnicity, are imposed by society and limit our choices. Feminists note that gender identity is heavily socialised, and writers on ethnicity point out that ethnic identity can be both chosen and ascribed by others. The balanced view is that identity is constructed within social constraints: we are active authors, but we write with a limited vocabulary supplied by society.

This dot point connects forward to deviance, where labelling shows how a deviant identity can be imposed, and to the inequality module, where gender, ethnicity and Indigenous identity shape life chances and self image.