Personality and Socialization
Society has several mechanisms for building us and our personality. The first mechanism is socialization and the second mechanism is social control. By defining what behavior is good, society also defines what is deviant behavior.
Through socialization we learn who we are and what is expected of us and others in our culture. All of our identities come from society. Socialization begins in childhood and continues throughout our lives as we encounter and move through different institutions.
Society provides us with ideologies, justifications for our systems of socialization, social control and stratification, and other social arrangements. Sociologists use the term sociological imagination to describe the ability to see the impact of these processes on our private lives, i.e., that we are a consequence of society. People are also the cause of society, i.e., we build it.
Because of the continuous operation of the four mechanisms society uses to produce us, it is difficult for a single person to make significant societal changes. However, many important changes happen because of social movements, which consist of many people organized to promote social change. We participate in socializing others, carrying out social control, reproducing the stratification system, and promoting ideologies. Sociologists use the term the social construction of reality to describe how people build the social world, especially as it is done through our everyday interactions. - David Schweingruber.
Different perspectives have been taken on the study of personality. The psychodynamic tradition has been characterized by an emphasis on intensive observation of human behavior in clinical settings as the basis for developing and modifying theories, with little focus on defining theories in a manner that allows them to be disproven based on contrary evidence. The tradition of personality research has attempted to present theories which can be supported or disproven scientifically. In both cases, the usefulness of a theory in advancing knowledge about personality depends on the relationship between the theory and the method in which it was derived. For instance, a theory built and modified almost exclusively based on intensive observation of human behavior may have more relevance to actual personality functioning than a theory which was derived in part based on defining terms that can be conveniently tested. In fact, the history of personality research has been characterized by self-criticism and dramatic shifts in methodology - University of Virginia
Society has several mechanisms for building us and our personality. The first mechanism is socialization. A second mechanism society has for building us is social control, which is used to re-build deviants or at least keep them from interfering with the normal operation of society. Social control ranges from gossip and ridicule to imprisonment and execution.
Society also has mechanisms for distributing valued resources. Through stratification society categorizes people and distributes valued resources to them based on the categories. Among the most important categories are class, race and gender. Our social class, race and gender affect how we are socialized, what type of social control we face, what opportunities we receive and what obstacles weface.
A Complementary Perspective to Primary Socialization
Personality and Socialization - Journals
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Allport, F. H., & Allport, G. W. (1921). Personality traits: Their classification and measurement. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 16, 6-40.
Allport, G. W. (1933). The study of personality by the experimental method. Character and Personality; a Quarterly for Psychodiagnostic and Allied Studies, 1, 259-264.
Murray, H. A. (1936). Basic concepts for a psychology of personality. Journal of General Psychology, 15, 241-268.
Cattell, R. B. (1950). Personality: A systematic, theoretical, and factual study. New York: McGraw-Hill. With good bibliography. [Read chapters 3-7 and 9.]
Eysenck, H. J. (1952). The scientific study of personality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. [Read chapters 2-4 and 7-8.]
Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 89, 730-755.
Fiske, D. W. (1974). The limits of the conventional science of personality. Journal of Personality, 42
Bem, D. J., & Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross-situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506-520.
Rorer, L. G., & Widiger, T. A. (1983). Personality structure and assessment. Annual Review of Psychology, 34, 431-463.
Carlson, R. (1984). Whats social about social psychology? Wheres the person in personality research? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1304-1309.
Kihlstrom, J. F., & Hastie, R. (1997). Mental representations of persons and personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.) Handbook of Personality Psychology (pp.712-736). San Diego: Academic Press. With good bibliography.
Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Boden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5-33.
McAdams, D. P., Diamond, A., de St. Aubin, E., Mansfield, E. (1997). Stories of commitment: The psychosocial construction of generative lives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 678-694.
Buss, D. M. (1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 42
Gray, J. A. (1990). Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion, 4, 269-288.
Derryberry, D., & Rothbart, M. K. (1994). Reactive and effortful processes in the organization of temperament. Development & Psychopathology, 9, 633-652.
Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Lykken, D. T., McGue, M., Segal, N. L., & Tellegen, A. (1990). Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Science, 250, 223-228. With good bibliography.
Kagan, J., Arcus, D., & Snidman, N. (1993). The idea of temperament: Where do we go from here? In R. Plomin & G. E. McClearn (Eds.), Nature, nurture, and psychology (pp. 197-210). With good bibliography. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McClelland, D. C. (1951). Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. With good bibliography. [Read preface only.]
Kernberg, O. (1975). Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. New York: Jason Aronson. With good bibliography. [Read chapters 1-3 and 5.]
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1987). Validation of the five factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1997). Longitudinal stability of adult personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 269-285). San Diego: Academic Press. With good bibliography.
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26-34.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1988). Mood and the mundane: Relations between daily life events and self-reported mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 296-308.
Watson, D., & Hubbard, B. (1998). Adaptational style and dispositional structure: Coping in the context of the five-factor model. Journal of Personality, 64, 737-774.
Revelle, W. (1995). Personality processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 295-328.
Winter, D. G., John, O. P., Stewart, A. J., Klohnen, E. C., Duncan, L. E. (1998). Traits and motives: Toward an integration of two traditions of personality research. Psychological Review, 105, 230-250.
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246-268.
McAdams, D. P. (1992). The five-factor model in personality: A critical appraisal. Journal of Personality, 60, 329-361.