Herbert Gintis: The Flip Side of Altruism

Economist Herbert Gintis studies why people do the things they do using game theory and mathematical models. An emeritus professor at the University of Massachusetts, Gintis has also taught at the Santa Fe Institute and Barnard College. The author of Game Theory Evolving and co-author of the forthcoming title, The Cooperative Species: Human Sociality and its Evolution, Gintis believes that most people are predisposed to cooperate and be altruistic, and they aren't even aware of it. Altruistic tendencies have a nastier flip side as well, but that's all part of what makes society work, according to Gintis.

Direct Dealer Stores Zone
24 Hrs Best Seller Category
New Tags Get Cheapest Price Shopping
Benefit Buy Direct Directory
Inter Brand Search
My Shopping Centre
Online store Review Directory
Only New Release Products

How did you get interested in studying altruism?

I studied all of the behavioral sciences -- biology, psychology, sociology, political science, economics, and anthropology -- and I thought that it was crazy that these fields could have completely different theories of how people behave. Not only different, they're contradictory. We're part of the Network of the Nature and Evolution Process. About 18 people work for it -- economists, biologists, anthropologists, psychologists. We use the experimental game theory to see what people want to do, what their preferences are.

Herbert Gintis: The Flip Side of Altruism

What have you found about human beings and their preferences?

Economists have a model of choice that's called the rational actor model. It generally assumes that people are selfish. In fact, that's a very important part of it. And one of the things we wanted to do is test whether or not that is the case. We found out that it is not the case. It's a rather very interesting phenomenon: People tend to be predisposed to cooperate with others at a cost to themselves as long as others will also cooperate. And people are willing to punish others when they do not cooperate.

The reason humans are so successful is normally attributed to the fact that they're smart. The reason they're smart is because humans operate in complex groups. The reason they can operate in complex groups is that they have strong reciprocity: Not only do they share, but they're willing to punish non-sharers. If you look at the whole range of social species, you find that punishing is very important.

Take bees. You always think of the hive as the big social collective, everybody does what they're supposed to do. But that's not true. Workers often try to lay eggs, even though only the queen is supposed to lay eggs. If workers lay eggs, there are other workers that run around, eat the eggs, then punish the workers that laid the eggs. Wherever you find cooperation, you'll also find punishment. Think of your own body. Each cell has its own self-interest to multiply. Why don't they go berserk? How do you get cells to cooperate? The answer is, you punish cells that don't cooperate. As far as we know, there is no other vertebrate species that punishes. Humans are by far the most social vertebrate species and we argue that that's why humans are so cooperative.

How do you define altruism? In your work, you speak of reciprocity. What is that?

An act is altruistic if it benefits another at a cost to yourself, where there is no possible mechanism whereby you could gain even in the long run somehow: Long term benefit to someone else with a long term cost to yourself. We call that altruism. By the way, it could be a long-term benefit to a group at a long-term cost to yourself. We want a definition of altruism that isn't subjective and also extends to animals. There is altruism in animals. It almost always depends on kin groups -- that is, you're nice to your kids, which is a biological objective.

There are really two types of reciprocity. Generally, before the work we did, reciprocity meant I help you if you help me. And that, of course, is not altruism. What we study -- "strong reciprocity" -- is a predisposition to cooperate, even when it's costly, and a predisposition to punish violators, free riders.

The problem with the term "altruism" is that there are many forms of altruism. For instance, unconditional altruism is where I help others no matter what. I just help. That's altruism, but it's not strong reciprocity. Mostly people think altruism is goody-goody or warm and fuzzy. But, the biggest part of making society work is needing to retaliate, wanting to hurt people who hurt you. It's much more important than the precondition to cooperate, because if you don't have punishment, you can't get cooperation. Strong reciprocity can be cooperation and conditional punishment.

So, we believe the heart of altruism is not only the willingness to cooperate and help -- empathy and caring for others -- but also this negative side of human nature: retaliation or retribution.

Let me give you an example that you would not even think is altruistic normally, but is: road rage.

What exactly do you mean by road rage and how is that altruistic?

Pathologically, it's when somebody behaves badly on the road and you shoot them. Usually, though, when people drive through a yellow light or are in a wrong lane, people honk their horns, shake their fists at them. Our argument is that this behavior of getting angry at another driver, who you're never going to see again, has strong reciprocity. It helps keep people honest.

If you don't drive the proper way, some guy honks his horn and you feel humiliated; you've done a bad thing and you got caught. But he didn't do it because he cared about keeping people honest. He honked his horn because he was pissed at you. This is true in subjective altruism. By honking your horn or yelling at someone for doing a bad thing, this is an altruistic act. It might have cost you something, not much. But it keeps the rules of the road going. It keeps people honest, so it's an altruistic act.

You're upholding the norm of fairness by hurting someone who was unfair. But you didn't do it because you wanted to uphold a norm for the group. You did it because you were angry at the guy.

What about when people do something spontaneous and show genuine feelings of empathy?

Our argument is that everybody is altruistic. But for most people if the cost gets sufficiently high, they stop being altruistic.

We argue that everyday life has little bits of altruism all over the place. They're generally not that costly, but they're extremely important. For instance, when I go on an airplane, everyone is nice to each other; they're never going to see each other again. Why be polite? You can imagine if you put chimps on an airplane, it would be a total disaster. Why go through these little amenities: "Can I help you with your bag?" "Let me move for you." "Let me get up so you can get out and go to the bathroom." Think about it. If you put a bunch of sociopaths on an airplane, it would be a disaster. But these little amenities, in everyday life, we tend to help each other even if it doesn't cost that much. This makes society work.

It may be that you really care about the other guy, and very often that's the case. Human beings' notion of empathy is very strong. And that's what altruism is. It's wanting to help people at a cost to yourself -- but also punish people at a cost to yourself when they're behaving in an anti-social manner. And then the question is, how can human beings be this way? No other species is like this. And that's where the biology comes in. You have to show that groups in which you have a strong reciprocator, an altruist, will do better than groups that don't have altruism.

Is that how game theory fits in?

The main thing game theory does is provide a methodology for experiments. After that, you've got all the biology, genetics, sociology. But game theory pervades everything we do. There's a whole theory on that called "behavioral game theory."

Tell us about your recent findings on how altruism is transmitted.

We're basically very hard-nosed mathematical behaviorists. We take the economic model of the rational actor and we put it through the hoops.

Sociologists have a concept called socialization, which means the internalization of norms, which is completely opposite from every other behavior. There's no such thing in biology or economics or political science or anthropology.

It seems to me that the principle of socialization was one of the established behavioral universal principles in academic sociology. What we propose is that human beings have this capacity to be programmed. Humans are the only ones where humans can want things just because they were socialized to want them -- want to be fair, want to share, want to help your group, want to be patriotic, want to be honest, want to be trustworthy, want to be cheerful -- when they are costly to our selves. If you're honest as a principle, that's good for everybody else and it costs you. So being honest is part of strong reciprocity.

Where does this come from?

Within a complex society, the general approach to this is gene-culture co-evolution. In biology, you get genetic information. In sociology or anthropology, you get cultural information. But really, in human society, they go together. Genetic evolution leads to culture. In that culture, given strong reciprocity, you can be rewarded for being nice or for cooperating. So cultural evolution can lead to genetic evolution. Human beings become nicer and more reciprocal and more honest. So, you get this whole dialectic back-and-forth between cultural evolution and genetic evolution and the product is human beings.

As a result, you get this very complex society, where if individuals don't learn to share or learn to be honest, the system punishes them. People who are programmable, then, are more fit than people who are not programmable.

So in that context of programmability, socialization -- the internalization of norms -- becomes the interest of fitness. If you brush your teeth because your parents told you to or you turned the other cheek, because in the long run that pays off, then you are more fit than your neighbors who are sociopaths.

The interesting thing is, once you get people who are programmable, you can program them to do a lot of things, even things that aren't in their interest. You can program people to be honest, even when it's in their self-interest sometimes not to be honest. A lot of people won't be honest. By programmability, you can get people to be more altruistic than they would ever be if they were self-interested. Now we have all these suicide bombers. That's completely obvious. You get these people who are programmable and you can program them to be willing to commit suicide. You could never do that to an animal, not willingly. Our argument is that this is one more kind of collective social mechanism that allows us to cooperate.

People don't like to see others suffer. After 9/11, you saw in NYC, the whole city rise up, people helping each other. It's just a spontaneous empathy. Empathy itself is the result of gene-culture coevolution, because, again, people are empathetic; They help in the short run because they feel like it; they feel good helping. But in the long run it helps them because people help back or some phenomenon allows empathy to be fitness enhancing. I think that's more important than what they were taught by their parents. But some of that can come in too.

Herbert Gintis: The Flip Side of Altruism

Chhavi Sachdev is international editor at Science & Theology News [http://www.stnews.org].

watch mobile phone Hot Deals Tektronix Power Supply 18V 5A 90W

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Sociology

Sociologists have covered a broad amount of material in their accumulated studies. Some, like Karl Marx, studied broad topics related to the whole of societies. He theorized that the root of human misery lies in the uneven distribution of wealth in society. Others, like Emile Durkheim, focused on more concise topics. He concentrated much of his effort on determining why certain sects of people are more apt to commit suicide than others. Still others, like Max Weber, studied patterns in culture throughout history to determine how much a social group can affect one's life. Though many sociologists study different topics, all use their recorded data to produce theories. These theories suggest how certain parts of the world fit together and how they work. If you break theories down further, you can sort them into three distinct categories: symbolic interactionism, functional analysis, and conflict theory. All three can use different observations to prove the same point.

Firstly, symbolic interactionism. This theory initially stated that one evaluates himself based on the conduct of others. As years went on, symbolic interactionism also showed that people use symbols to encapsulate their experiences. Symbolic interaction is generally conducted at the Microsociological level. That is - it examines small scale patterns of social interaction. For example. If you think of a family member as an aunt or an uncle, you will behave in a certain way. If the person is a best friend, you will carry yourself quite differently. Without symbolic interaction, we would have no way to define relationships, and we would be reduced to a level of animal interaction. In short, symbolic interactionists analyze how our behaviors depend on the ways we define ourselves and others.

Anthropology Sociology

Fashion Survey Survey Info Plus Gifts Survey Today Survey Daily Survey Review Survey Survey Station Survey Center Refurbish Survey Top List Survey Trends Survey Newest Survey Produvt Survey New Items Studio Hotlist Center Newest Center Products Center Shop Center Trends Center Reviews Center Gift Center Direct Info Plus Tools Plus Search Station Review Estimate Estimate Search Estimate Ideas Ideas Premium Green Stuido Daily Resale Review Studio Gift Resale Store Direct Station Today Station Daily Studio New York Plus

Functional analysis basically states that society is a whole made up of independent parts that work together. A sociologist that was mentioned earlier in the paper, Emile Durkheim, was one of the most prominent sociologists associated with this view. His work noted that, although the whole of society works together, individual sects of people can be more likely to do certain things than others. Most notable of all his studies is likely his work done on finding social factors that may contribute to the likelihood of a person committing suicide. He observed that how strong or weak social bonds are have a strong impact on suicide rate in a social group. For example, women and protestants are more apt to commit suicide because their ties to their social groups are weaker. Also, he noted that if bonds are too strong, the risk for suicide increases as well. A man who loses his spouse may be more likely to commit suicide, because he sees death as a better option than living without his wife. In this case, their feelings were deeply integrated.

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Sociology

Finally, there is conflict theory. This theory came as a result of Karl Marx's studies on social equality. He concluded that the key to human history is class struggle. This meant that one small group of people controls the means, while a much larger group of workers is exploited for their benefit. This, of course, was recorded at a time when worker's rights, labor laws, and capitalism were in their infancy. For the most part, workers were at the mercy of their employers. Marx suggested that if all the wealth was shared evenly, humans could coexist in harmony.

These three theories not only explained human interaction when they were created many years ago, but can also be applied today to more modern situations. Take Emile Durkheim. His studies on human interaction stated that the group of people one is surrounded by determines how he carries himself. If Durkheim were alive today, and he intended to undertake a study of gangs, he would likely start out by observing what type of external factors lead to an individual's desire to join one. External forces, such as parental neglect, lack of friendship, and lack of social activity could all be considered legitimate reasons for one to join a gang. Upon entering, Durkheim would follow several gang members and see how drastically a person's values would change in order to conform to the lifestyle of the gang. In short, he would show that weak bonds with family fuel a desire for strong bonds with another source - whether that source is a positive or a negative influence.

The three sub levels of Theoretical Perspectives help us to better understand how sociologists go about crafting their theories, and how they will experiment to attempt to prove them. While there is no single way to go about producing sociological theories, each one of the sub categories listed in this essay can offer a legitimate explanation for almost any sociological issue.

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Sociology

mobile phone watches Cheap Dispenser Kit For Liquid Detergent Low Price Mmf Industries Tamper Evident Cash Bags

The Psychology of Culture

On the evolutionary, contemporary and universal dimensions of culture and identifying the main research areas in cultural psychology

The term culture would mean the entire gamut of activities, beliefs, lifestyle, habits, rituals, arts, ethics and behavioral patterns of a society. Yet despite the wide definition of culture, the elements of culture being too varied and divergent, it is not easy to provide a relationship between culture and psychology. There are two common ways by which the relationship between psychology and culture is studied, through intra-cultural psychology or behavioral patterns within a particular society and intercultural psychology or behavior and psychological characteristics between societies.

Anthropology Sociology

Intra-cultural psychology seeks to understand the cultural basis of behavior by studying the peculiarities of a society, its rules and norms and shows how traditions shape or influence the collective psyche of the people within the society. However in psychology this is simply considered as 'cultural psychology' a straightforward term denoting the study of cultural traditions and their effects on the psychology of people. This sort of categorization may be misleading as it tends to see cultures as fundamentally different units and highlights differences rather than similarities. Cross-cultural psychology focuses on finding universal patterns of behavior or beliefs that are common among people of all cultures and this is what has been described here as 'inter-cultural' psychology. The terms 'intra-cultural' and 'inter-cultural' psychology would be more conducive to finding a psychology that shows convergent patterns of cultural behavior among people across societies.

The Psychology of Culture

The psychology of culture requires further development in the areas of defining culture and in finding cultural roots that would highlight collective psyche or universal patterns of behavior. Humans are finally united by common emotions and psyche and this broader cultural psychology has been promoted by Carl Gustav Jung who focused his studies on the importance of deriving or understanding the collective unconscious with those elements or archetypes that are carried from one generation to another.

Culture has been defined as the accumulated experiences of a society as a whole that has been socially transmitted so the collective unconscious in Jungian terms would serve as a repository of cultural imprints that shape human behavior right from childhood. The three predominant schools of cultural psychology have been identified as having activity, symbolic or individualistic approach (Carl Ratner explains this well). The activity approach highlights social activities of a group, the symbolic approach defines culture as shared meanings and concepts or symbols. The individualistic approach highlights the interaction of the individual with society and through this, individuals construct their personal culture. But I would downplay the personal aspect of culture and suggest culture as mainly a group phenomenon akin to individual conformity in society so apart from activity and symbolism, culture should be defined by its beliefs, values and ethics. Culture is finally about shared activities, shared symbolisms and shared belief systems.

The story of the birth of human culture would be closely related to the story of human evolution as with the formation of tribes, humans learned and adapted to group behavior. Man was born alone but became a social animal primarily due to survival needs and the development of culture is thus rooted in man's own needs for security, safety and survival. Humans follow rules, norms, traditions of a society simply 'to live' and culture is about conformity. So the psychology of culture is also the psychology of conformity and even the non conformist in a way conforms to certain basic social and cultural rules and traditions.

As 'culture' represents a broad spectrum of human activity, cultural psychology should involve the study of:

Evolutionary and historical patterns of human behavior, closely related to anthropology Contemporary social trends (for example: celebrity culture, workplace culture, globalization) closely related to sociology, and The intra-cultural and inter-cultural patterns of behavior to recognize the universal elements in human cognition, emotion and perception

Thus there seems to be three dimensions to the study of culture in psychology - the evolutionary, the contemporary and the universal. The evolutionary and historical dimension of cultural psychology would have to be largely explained in terms of Jungian psychology whereas social psychology becomes an integral part of the contemporary dimension. The universal dimension for the study of cultural psychology uses behavioral patterns or cognitive psychology to gauge at how people are programmed to behave in certain situations and whether these behavioral patterns are common across cultures and if not, whether there are only culture specific behaviors.

Psychologists have claimed that there are certain culture specific behaviors and certain universal behavioral patterns among humans and it is important to understand whether it is possible to delineate behaviors that are culture specific or intra-cultural and those that are universal or inter-cultural. If such an attempt is made, then it is possible to say that ethics and values, legal structures, lifestyle, activities, rituals and beliefs can widely vary between cultures and these elements represent intra cultural similarities and inter cultural differences. Yet certain attitudes and worldviews or opinions, emotions and perception, as also basic human traits of say intelligence or imagination are not culture specific and may have intra-cultural differences and inter-cultural similarities. For example emotions and emotional expressions are common across all cultures so we all cry when we are sad and laugh when we are happy. We also have common attitudes and opinions such as supportive views towards honesty and we universally detest crime. This is however the universal behavior found across cultures although there may still be variations. The strong intra-cultural beliefs and attitudes that are not universal are usually related to customs rather than emotions, for example attitudes towards marriage and courtship, vary widely between cultures or even dining table manners differ between cultures.

Thus human emotions and expressions and behavior motivated by such emotions tend to be universal or inter-cultural and customs/traditions and human behavior motivated by customs tend to be intra-cultural or culture specific. Cultures in today's world are largely shaped by religious belief systems, political and social or economic systems and that is why culture seems to be almost inflexible in it roots as seen in rigid religious structures of society, although the changing cultural patterns are manifested in political and economic systems. If we provide an agenda for cultural psychology, the future research areas in the psychology of culture should involve

Definition of culture - describing and identifying the concepts and structures of culture and answering what exactly constitutes culture Identifying different dimensions of culture as they relate to cultural psychology - and studying the evolutionary, contemporary and universal aspects of culture Expanding research in the current schools of cultural psychology on activity, symbolism and belief systems as well as considering individual or personal approaches in cultural psychology Establishing the relationships between culture and anthropology, sociology, psychoanalysis and human cognition and emotions. Recognizing similarities in human emotions and expressions that are the basis of universal cultural elements and identifying differences in customs and practices

The psychology of culture is still a developing field and should try to answer basic questions on how behavioral patterns developed within cultures and why behaviors are similar or vary between cultures. The five areas of study listed above suggest the main problems and future directions in the study of culture within psychology and psychology within culture.

The Psychology of Culture

Reflections in Psychology - Part I - by Saberi Roy (2009)
http://www.lulu.com/content/5865445

mobile phone watches Discount Cardone 60 3104 Remanufactured Cv Axle

Online PhD in Counseling

In today's stressful economy, it may be increasingly difficult for individuals to establish themselves as unique for the working world. Without being in a position to stand above the crowd, your chances of being hired fall dramatically. Human Resource representatives take only twenty to thirty seconds to glance over an individual resume. Multiply that by a few hundred for the multitudes of unemployed individuals competing for the economy's remaining jobs and it becomes clear that without being bold legitimately, it's difficult to secure a well-paying job.

Any kind of alternatives for those remaining on the outside of the employment world, seeking to get in? Well, one idea has grown more popular than ever over the past decade, as the economy has dropped steadily. Returning to school for your first degree or for yet another degree might be exactly the boost you need to allow you to be noticed to possible employers. Additionally, going back to school is simpler today than before thanks largely to the internet. Today, there is a whole horde of online schools which can be attended, that provide legitimate courses and degrees. A few of these online colleges have even begun offering larger and more illustrious degrees through their online forum.

Anthropology Sociology

An online PhD in counseling is the highest amount of education attainable within the social work field. Generally, a PhD in counseling comes along with a specific licensure, making their practice more exclusive and pricey consequently. A PhD in counseling generally comes escorted with a specific type of psychology as in child psychology or group psychology. Beyond a person's specialty within counseling, you'll find often cases of a student electing to pursue research, education, clinical practice or consultation as the chief medium of the work. Most students who earn a PhD in counseling will go on to become college professors. It is quite difficult to land that treasured tenure position at a university, but part-time professors are regularly very popular and this process will better your chances of sliding in a tenured spot from the inside. The 2nd most common field of work is research, developing new treatments and healing. Additionally there is a massive amount work done by graduated counseling students in the world of private practice. This career provides a very flexible schedule and can be very profitable if you can to establish a great clientele.

Online PhD in Counseling

A PhD is what can be described as terminal degree, meaning there is nowhere higher anybody can continue on the degree scale. Once a PhD is achieved, the individual is actually a "doctor" and it is generally quite revered and respected from the academic community along with the professional and public worlds. This respect is deserved and needed though, as a PhD is more expensive than every other degree and usually requires the better part of ten years to finish the essential schooling. An unbelievable array of classes must be completed during a PhD program. Not only will a student take part in numerous psychology classes, but additionally writing, mathematics, sociology, history, pharmaceuticals, biology, anatomy and anthropology can all be within counseling PhD programs. The workload is by no means simple, and it also requires great dedication and persistent determination to finish a PhD in counseling.

An online PhD isn't any laughing matter. Before deciding, that you would like to return to school to earn your PhD in counseling you need to be sure to seek information. Speak to people you know who have tried online courses before and see what they thought of the experience. Most of all, follow your heart, only you know exactly what is right for you, so let your heart lead your life.

Online PhD in Counseling

My Colleges and Careers helps students connect with the best schools to earn their college degree and embark on a rewarding career! A powerful resource for individuals of all walks of life, My Colleges and Careers connects people with the programs that help them earn degrees on campus or online.

watches mobile phone Cheap Whatman Polycap Tf 150 Ptfe Capsule Filter Low Price Mmf Industries Tamper Evident Cash Bags

Sociology of Reality TV

You know something has permeated a culture when American colleges and universities are charging big money to teach classes about the sociology and psychology of reality TV.

Aside from the more traditional subjects like calculus and European History, college students are paying several grand a semester to collectively watch and discuss Big Brother, American Idol or MTV's The Real World. Students debate questions like "Why is reality TV so popular?" or "Why do people want to be broadcast while using the toilet or failing to discipline their wild children?" I am sure the founders of the great American institutions of learning are backflipping in their graves knowing that students are writing papers about Flavor Flav, but many academics argue that reality TV actually provides a new lens through which to view and interpret our culture. The question remains: Could reality TV actually be teaching us anything, or are these classes just dangling carrots to get more students to pay ,000 tuition bills?

Anthropology Sociology

No matter what, popular culture has arguably been taken over by television's version of reality. Though these shows are not something many of us wish to put into a time capsule to reflect the condition of American media in the 21st century, most of us cannot get enough of them. There are just as many closet watchers of reality TV as there are self-proclaimed reality addicts. And, it doesn't even seem like the story-line or topic matters anymore - it's the format that grabs us. The same person might watch Project Runway, Making the Band and Flip that House. So perhaps it's just exciting to peer into the minds, emotions and lives of others. The popularity of blogs would certainly affirm that. In a time when we know less and less about what goes on behind the doors of the Oval Office or the gilded lobbies of American's largest corporations, it seems we all just want a little bit of truth, or else a whole lot of candor.

Sociology of Reality TV

Sociology of Reality TV

Are you a Reality T.V. fan? There is a whole community waiting for you at Reality Community [http://www.reality-community.com] - [http://www.reality-community.com] Ed Charkow the author of this article is an avid poster and participant there. If you are a Reality TV junkie - he would love to see you there.

watches mobile phone Buy Shure Pg14 Pg30 Wireless Headset System K7

Process of Socialization

Socialization is a process of learning norms, rules, regulations, values and attitudes of society. It is a lifelong process which starts from childhood till to the death of a person. Socialization is a vital process of learning through which the society exists. Each and every society socializes its members according to its own values. For example, if a baby enters in American society, he/she socializes according to the characteristics of American society. In the same way, the children of Russian societies are being socialized according to the characteristics of Russian societies. A man learns ways of attitudes, behaviors, languages, and cultures of a society through the process of socialization.

What is human nature?

Anthropology Sociology

The debate of "nature" (heredity) and "nurture" (the social environment) is being made since decades. Some scientists think that nature plays an important role in the socialization while others view that nurture is only the way through which a member can be socialized. To answer this controversial question, one can give logical reasons that human beings do not have natural language. An infant comes in this society having only bones, flesh, and breathing system. If this very infant kept in isolation for several years, he/she cannot be able to speak even a single word. Heredity provides those essential things which are important to grow up but social environment is far important than heredity through which a children learns the language. Without the concept of language a member cannot create relationships with others. Language is a source to create relationships and to take part into the social interaction. So, nurture or social environment is so much important that it converts an animal into a social animal.

Process of Socialization

Cooley and the looking-Glass self

Charles Hurton Cooley was a renowned social scientist who thought that our sense of self develops from interaction with others. To describe this process, Cooley coined the term "looking- glass self theory" in the year 1902.

According to Cooley, there are three elements in the looking-glass self theory.
1. We imagine how we appear to the others. For example, we can guess that others see us as intelligent or stupid.
2. We interpret others' reactions. We may come to know that how others evaluate us. Do they like us for being intelligent? Do they dislike us for being stupid?
3. We develop a self-concept. After the reactions of others, we develop feelings and ideas about ourselves.

Looking-glass self theory is like a "social mirror" in which a person can see his/her reflection. This process of self development clearly shows us the image of our personality. We can judge our personality by feedback of others. So, the process of looking-glass self plays an important role in the process of socialization.

Agents of socialization

Agents of socialization are the people and groups which influence our emotions, attitudes and behavior etc. Family, religion, day care, school, peer groups and workplace are the agents of socialization that prepare us to take our place in society.

• Family

Family is an important agent of socialization where a child starts learning the language of family. Slowly and gradually a children learns the roles of family members. He/she recognizes the roles of father, mother, sisters and brothers. It has been seen that most of the children follow the roles of others like putting on glasses and reading newspapers as their parents do.

• Religion

Religion is also an important agent of socialization where an individual learns about right and wrong. Religions provide basic ideas of morality which become the part of our life in future. Religion teaches us about the way of dressing, speech, and manners which are suitable for us in formal occasions.

• Day care

Day care is another agent of socialization in which the children are being socialized and benefited by the others. It has been become a tradition in every society to hire a person for daily wages to take care of the children. Day care process stimulates the intellectual personality of children.

• The school and peer groups

The school and peer groups are the agents of socialization where a child meets with a large group of people of similar age. Apart from education, the students are linked with each other for common interests. In this way of sharing ideas and common interests, students find peer groups for themselves and they start learning from those peer groups. Friends, clubs, gangs, and the neighbors are some examples of the peer groups. While entering into a school and peer group a member starts learning new norms and characteristics like athletics ability, coolness, toughness physical appearance and attraction etc.

• The workplace

Workplace is another agent of socialization in which an individual enters into a mature age. Apparently, workplace is place where an individual serves as an employer and earns a few dollars. Besides this, an employer has lot of opportunities to learn essential things for future. It has been seen that co-workers always advise about the future plans and lifestyles. It can be said that it is a sort of rehearsal for future activities. Therefore, it is proved that workplace is an agent of socialization where an individual has the opportunity to learn a lot.

Summary

Socialization is a lifelong process in which an individual learns the essentials of society. The norms, mores, values, attitudes, thoughts and folkways are being transmitted from one generation to another with the help of socialization. A Child brings only few things with him/her in heredity but social environment provides the totality of life with the help of socialization. Charles Hurton Cooley presented the looking-glass self theory which contributes largely in the process of socialization. As far as the agents of socialization are concerned, there are five main agents such as family, religion, day care, school, peer groups and workplace.

Process of Socialization

To find a lot more on marketing, management, supply chain, finance and other core subjects of business administration please visit the site: http://mba-lectures.com/

watches cell phone Cheap Dispenser Kit For Liquid Detergent Low Price Mmf Industries Tamper Evident Cash Bags Discounted Genuine Gm Parts 20793342 Driver Side Front

Person Centered Care - From An Institution To A Home

Recently, person-centered care in nursing homes has been receiving a great amount of attention. Organizations have developed with the sole purpose of advancing the philosophy and approaches of this model of care. More nursing homes have undergone culture change by using a person-centered approach. And, there is an increasing amount of publications written about person-centered care, person-first care, patient-centered care and resident-centered care in nursing homes. Although the philosophy behind this care model is not new, some of the specific approaches and methods used in nursing homes today are rather new and very exciting. It takes a total commitment, from the administration to floor staff, to make person-centered care work. If there has been some hesitancy in implementing this type of care in your facility, its time to get excited about the best way of delivering the most highly individualized care there is. And, yes, you can do it!

First of all, leadership must believe in the person-centered model of care. This is no easy task for some administrators and directors of nursing, who have been used to more traditional forms of care. It involves more than prettying up the facility with more home-like creature comforts. It is a philosophy of care that truly puts the resident in the center of the care process. Routines, schedules and tasks become secondary to the needs, desires and pace of the resident.

Anthropology Sociology

Second, leadership must get all employees on board with this type of thinking. Nursing, social services, activities, dietary, housekeeping and laundry, and therapies must be educated and shown the benefits of this kind of care in order to believe that it can and will work in their facility. Skilled nursing homes have traditionally provided institutionalized care under the old medical model that places medication passes, treatments, dinning schedules, and pre-scheduled activities before the needs of the resident. Leadership must emphasize that person-centered care essentially turns this old model of care upside down.

Person Centered Care - From An Institution To A Home

Third, leadership must get residents and families involved in designing, customizing and implementing person-centered care through active participation in one-on-one discussions, resident council meetings, and family focus groups. Administration and staff cannot make all the decisions that go into care without critical input from those they care for. Residents provide important information concerning care issues such as when they like to wake up in the morning and when they like to go to bed, what they like to eat and when they would like to eat, preference of a bath, shower, or some other bathing experience, preference of caregiver, and where they would like to live in the facility. Families offer details on their loved ones history, likes and dislikes, religious and spiritual preferences, past occupations and careers, and hobbies. All of this input helps staff to create a more unique and individualized resident-centered care environment and experience.

Fourth, leadership gathers all of the ideas and information they have collected from residents, families, and staff and rolls out their special version of person-centered care in their building. Their model of care may include breaking down long hospital-like hallways and corridors (which are very common in many nursing homes) into smaller neighborhoods or communities of 6 to 8 residents. They may wish to have caregivers assign themselves to each neighborhood and provide consistent assignments. They may want to provide cross-training for nursing assistants in activities and housekeeping and create a new position: the person-centered specialist. They may endorse natural waking and retiring, liberalized diets, easy access to outdoors, and spontaneous activities 24 hours a day. These are just a few ideas that facilities can include in their journey through person-centered care.

Last, all employees must feel person-centered care in their hearts. This is where real care from anyway. It can also be where true culture change comes from, turning their once traditional and institutional facility into a person-centered home where residents want to live, families want to visit and staff want to work. Employees must also understand something else very important about person-centered care: it is not an end unto itself. Instead, it is a process, a ongoing journey, and one in which mistakes will be made and processes changed in order to constantly improve not only the quality of care in nursing homes, but the quality of life itself.

Person Centered Care - From An Institution To A Home

Jim Collins, Ph.D. has developed and presented continuing education seminars and workshops for over 16 years and has taught college courses in Sociology, Psychology, Anthropology and Gerontology for over 15 years. He holds a Bachelor's Degree in Gerontological Studies, Master's Degree in Sociology, a certificate in Gerontology and Life Span Development, and a Ph.D. in Health Care Administration. He has owned and operated a Geropsychiatric Practice, a nursing home consulting company and is proud to be a part of the Provider Services, Inc. family of rehabilitation and long term care facilities in the great state of Ohio.

mobile phone watches Cheap Maxell Cleaning Tape Sdlt 1 S4 Hot Deals Tektronix Power Supply 18V 5A 90W Discounted Discounted Bronze Finish Lion Fountain