SOCIALIZATION

Socialization

What is Socialization?
Socialization generally refers to the process in which people learn the skills, knowledge,
values, motives, and roles (i.e., culture) of the groups to which they belong or the
communities in which they live. It should be pointed out from the beginning of this chapter
that socialization includes two components (Long and Hadden 1985). The first component of
socialization is the process, mentioned above, that leads to the adoption of culture. The
second component is the Outcome of the process, for example, "Was the socialization
successful?" or "He has been socialized to believe God exists." Socialization is seen as
society's principal mechanism for influencing the development of character and behavior.
Most sociologists treat socialization "as a cornerstone both for the maintenance of society and
for the well-being of the individual"

Elements of Socialization

As socialization is a fundamental sociological concept, there are a number of components to

this concept. While not every sociologist will agree which elements are the most important,
or even how to define some of the elements of socialization, the elements outlined below
should help clarify what is meant by socialization.

Goals of Socialization:
Arnett (1995), in presenting a new theoretical understanding of socialization, outlined what
he believes to be the three goals of socialization:
1. Impulse control and the development of a conscience
2. Role preparation and performance, including occupational roles, gender roles, and roles in
institutions such as marriage and parenthood
3. The cultivation of sources of meaning, or what is important, valued, and to be lived for In
short, socialization is the process that prepares humans to function in social life. It should be
re-iterated here that socialization is culturally relative - people in different cultures are
socialized differently. This distinction does not and should not inherently force an evaluative
judgment. Socialization, because it is the adoption of culture, is going to be different in every

1|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

culture. Socialization, as both process and an outcome, is not better or worse in any particular
culture.

Primary and Secondary Socialization

Socialization is a life process, but is generally divided into two parts. Primary socialization
takes place early in life, as a child and adolescent. Secondary socialization refers to the
socialization that takes place throughout one's life, both as a child and as one encounters new
groups that require additional socialization. While there are scholars who argue that only one
or the other of these occurs, most social scientists tend to combine the two, arguing that the
basic or core identity of the individual develops during primary socialization, with more
specific Changes occurring later - secondary socialization - in response to the acquisition of
new group memberships and roles and differently structured social situations. The need for
later life socialization may stem from the increasing complexity of society with its
corresponding increase in varied roles and responsibilities (Mortimer and Simmons
1978).Mortimer and Simmons (1978) outline three specific ways these two parts of
socialization differ:
1. Socialization in childhood is thought to be concerned with the regulation of Biological
drives. In adolescence, socialization is concerned with the development of Overarching
values and the self-image. In adulthood, socialization involves more overt and Specific norms
and behaviors, such as those related to the work role as well as more superficial Personality
features.
2. In earlier periods, the socializee (the person being socialized) more clearly Assumes the
status of learner within the context of the family of orientation, the school, or the Peer group.
Also, relationships in the earlier period are more likely to be affectively charged, i.e., highly
emotional. In adulthood, though the socializee takes the role of student at times, much
socialization occurs after the socializee has assumed full incumbency of the adult role. There
is also a greater likelihood of more formal relationships due to situational contexts (e.g., work
environment), which moderates down the affective component.
3. The child and adolescent may be more easily malleable than the adult. Also, much adult
socialization is self-initiated and voluntary; adults can leave or terminate the process at any
time.

2|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

Socialization is, of course, a social process. As such, it involves interactions between people.
Socialization, as noted in the distinction between primary and secondary, can take place in
Multiple contexts and as a result of contact with numerous groups. Some of the more
significant Contributors to the socialization process are: parents, friends, schools, siblings,
and co-workers.
Each of these groups include a culture that must be learned and to some degree appropriated
by
the socializee in order to gain admittance to the group.

Total Institutions

Not all socialization is voluntary nor is all socialization successful. There are components of
society designed specifically to resocialize individuals who were not successfully socialized
to begin with. For instance, prisons and mental health institutions are designed to resocialize
the people who are deemed to have not been successfully socialized. Depending on the
degree of isolation and resocialization that takes place in a given institution, some of these
institutions are labeled total institutions. In his classic study of total institutions, Erving
Goffman (1961:6)
gives the following characteristics of total institutions:
1. All aspects of life are conducted in the same place under the same authority
2. The individual is a member of a large cohort, all treated alike
3. All daily activities (over a 24-hour period) are tightly scheduled
4. There is a sharp split between supervisors and lower participants
5. Information about the member's fate is withheld
The most common examples of total institutions include mental hospitals, prisons, and
military
Boot camps, though there are numerous other institutions that could be considered total
Institutions as well. The goal of total institutions is to facilitate a complete break with one's
old life in order for the institution to resocialize the individual into a new life.
Mortimer and Simmons (1978) note a difference in socialization methodologies in different
types of institutions. When the goal of an institution is socialization (primary or secondary),
the institution tends to use normative pressures. When the goal of an institution is
resocialization of deviants, coercion is frequently involved

3|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

Broad and Narrow Socialization

An interesting though seldom used distinction in types of socialization was proposed by
Arnett
(1995). Arnett distinguishes between broad and narrow socialization:
Broad socialization is intended to promote independence, individualism, and self-
expression; it
is dubbed broad because this type of socialization has the potential of resulting in a broad
range
of outcomes
Narrow socialization is intended to promote obedience and conformity; it is dubbed narrow
Because there is a narrow range of outcomes
These distinctions correspond to Arnett's definition of socialization, which is:
The whole process by which an individual born with behavioral potentialities of enormously
Wide range, is led to develop actual behavior which is confined with a much narrower range;
the range of what is customary and acceptable for him according to the standards of his group
Arnett explains that his understanding of socialization should not be understood as having
just two options, broad or narrow. Instead, the author argues that socialization can be broad or
narrow within each of the seven socializing forces he outlines (e.g., family, friends, etc.).
Because each force can be either broad or narrow, there is a wide variety of possible broad
narrow socialization combinations. Finally, Arnett notes two examples where his distinction
is relevant. First, Arnett argues that there are often differences in socialization by gender.
Where these differences exist, argues Arnett, socialization tends to be narrower for women
than for men. Arnett also argues that Japanese socialization is narrow as there is more
pressure toward conformity in that culture. Arnett argues that this may account for the lower
crime rates in Japan.

The Importance of Socialization

One of the most common methods used to illustrate the importance of socialization is to draw
upon the few unfortunate cases of children who were, through neglect, misfortune, or willful

4|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

abuse, not socialized by adults while they were growing up. Examples of such children can
be found here.

Theoretical Understandings of Socialization

Socialization, as a concept in social scientific research, has evolved over time. While the
basic idea outlined above has been a component of most understandings of socialization,
there has been quite a variety of definitions and theories of socialization. Some of these
approaches are presented here as definitional variety is often informative (see Holland 1970,
Mortimer and Simmons 1978, and Long and Hadden 1985 for more information).
[Link] Interactionism - the self develops as a result of social interactions; as a result,
socialization is highly dependent on the situations in which the actor finds him/herself; this
approach also argues that socialization is a continuous, lifelong process
[Link] Theory - socialization is seen as a process of acquisition of appropriate norms,
attitudes, self-images, values, and role behaviors that enable acceptance in the group and
effective performance of new roles; in this framework, socialization is seen as a conservative
force, permitting the perpetuation of the social organization in spite of the turn-over of
individual members through time
3.Reinforcement Theory - the self develops as a result of cognitive evaluations of costs and
benefits; this understanding assumes that the socializee, in approaching new roles, is an
independent and active negotiator for advantages in relationships with role partners and
membership groups
4.Internalization Theory - socialization is a series of stages in which the individual learns to
participate in various levels of organization of society; this theory contends that the child
internalizes a cognitive frame of reference for interpersonal relations and a common system
of expressive symbolism in addition to a moral conscience; this approach was advocated by
Talcott Parsons

Socialization as Joining Groups

The concept of socialization has traditionally addressed the problem of individual adjustment
to
society. In all of the approaches outlined above, socialization has, in one way or another,
referred to the idea that society shapes its members toward compliance and cooperation with

5|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

societal requirements. In order to reduce confusion, develop a research methodology for

measuring socialization, and potentially lead to the comparability of research findings from
different studies, Long and Hadden (1985) proposed a revised understanding of socialization.
Rather than referring to a vague adoption or learning of culture, Long and Hadden reframed
socialization as "the medium for transforming newcomers into bona fide members of a
group."
Before discussing some of the specifics of this approach, it may be useful to outline some of
the
critiques Long and Hadden present of earlier approaches to socialization.
According to Long and Hadden, many earlier approaches to socialization extended
socialization to every part of human social life. As a result, everyone becomes both a
socializing agent (socializer) and a novice (socializee) in all encounters with others. This
conceptualization leaves socialization without a social home; it is all around but no place in
particular. Another criticism of previous approaches is that they allowed socialization to
include anything, and anything which is part of the process at one time may be excluded at
another. With this conceptualization, any phenomenon may shift its status in the socialization
process without changing its own composition or expression. In other words, socialization
includes virtually everything, excludes almost nothing, and shifts with circumstance and
outcomes. Additionally, previous approaches to socialization lacked specificity about the
nature of socialization activity. Defining socialization by its outcomes made it unnecessary to
stipulate the nature of the process conceptually. Socialization could be attributed to this or
that but in order to truly understand what is taking place it is necessary to go beyond just
pointing to socializing agents and specify what it is about those agents that is doing the
socializing. Another serious drawback of earlier approaches is that they disregard the process
component of socialization. Doing so limits the socialization concept to employment
primarily as a post hoc interpretive category that is used to lend significance to findings
defined and developed in other terms.
As a result of these criticisms, Long and Hadden (1985) found themselves presented with a
two-fold task:
l. locate socialization and its social boundaries more precisely
2.specify the distinctive properties which distinguish it from related phenomena
To accomplish this, Long and Hadden developed a new understanding of socialization,
"socialization is the process of creating and incorporating new members of a group from a

6|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

pool of newcomers, carried out by members and their allies". Under this understanding, the
principal agents of socialization are certified and practicing members of the group to which
novices are being socialized. It should be noted that certified here is only a shortened way of
saying "a socially approved member of the group." Thus, Long and Hadden's revised
understanding of socialization sees it as both the process and outcome of joining groups.

Research Examples
Numerous examples of research on socialization could be presented in this section. One
important area of socialization research involves differences in gender socialization, but
much of that research is summarized in the chapter on gender. The following three research
examples are interesting in that they explore both primary and secondary socialization and do
so from varying perspectives.
Socialization and Social Class:
Ellis, Lee, and Peterson (1978), developing a research agenda begun by Melvin L. Kohn
(1959), explored differences in how parents raise their children relative to their social class.
Kohn (1959) found that lower class parents were more likely to emphasize conformity in
their children whereas middle-class parents were more likely to emphasize creativity and
selfreliance. Elliset. al. proposed and found that parents value conformity over self-reliance in
children to the extent that conformity superseded self-reliance as a criterion for success in
their own endeavors. In other words, Ellis et. al. verified that the reason lower-class parents
emphasize conformity in their children is because they experience conformity in their day-
today activities. For example, factory work is far more about conforming than innovation.
Another study in this same area explored a slightly different component of this relationship.
Erlanger (1974) was interested in a correlation between social class and physical violence.
While he did not find a strong correlation indicating lower class individuals were more likely
to employ physical violence in punishing their children, he did present evidence concerning
several outdated propositions. Erlanger's findings include:
physical punishment does not lead to working class authoritarianism
childhood punishment experiences do not explain the greater probability that working
class
adults, as opposed to middle class adults, will commit homicide
general use of corporal punishment is not a precursor to child abuse
use of corporal punishment is not part of a subcultural positive evaluation of violence

7|Page
 SOCIALIZATION

It should be noted that this is an older study and that more recent findings may have shed
more
light on these issues. It should also be noted that Erlanger readily points out when his
findings
are strongly supported or weakly supported by his data. It behooves the interested party to
read
his paper directly rather than rely on the summary above for the specific nuances.
Socialization and Death Preparation:
Marshall (1975) interviewed a number of retirement home residents to explore how their
environment influenced their thinking about death. In essence, Marshall was examining
secondary socialization concerning mortality. Marshall found that a combination of
relationships, behavioral changes, and retirement home culture contributed to a conception of
death that was both accepting and courageous. Residents of this particular retirement home
found themselves with more time on their hands - to think about death - because they no
longer had to care for their own homes. Additionally, they found themselves surrounded by
people in a situation similar to their own: they were basically moving into the retirement
home to prepare for death. The prevalence of elderly people facilitated discussions of death,
which also helped socialize the residents into their acceptance of mortality. Finally, the
retirement home community encouraged a culture of life and fulfillment in part to counter-act
the frequency of death. Some residents calculated there was one death per week in the
retirement home. In light of such numbers, it was important to the success of the community
to maintain a positive culture that embraced life yet accepted death. In summary, Marshall
found that numerous factors contributed to the socialization of residents into a positive
lifestyle that was also accepting of and preparatory for their impending deaths.

8|Page