How does an individual categorize information; how does she recreate knowledge? Introducing the basic mental functions of people, how they manage information, will show us why they choose a certain content over another. Taking this assumption one step further (maybe with the risk of taking it too far), I will try to explain what makes content so interesting.
Defining social representation
Social representations are a part of the studies of social psychology and were first introduced in the scientific community in the 1960s from Serge Moscovici. He mentions that social representations have 2 roles:
- First they make objects, persons or events we encounter conventional.This is a form of categorization, where people ascribe objects to certain models. The association of communism with the color red is an example. When a new element does not conform to a specific type, we then “…constrain it to assume given form, to enter a given category, in fact to become identical to the others, at the risk of its being neither understood nor decoded.”
- Additionally, representations are – as the author describes – prescriptive, meaning “they impose themselves upon us with an irresistible force.” Their power comes exactly from the fact, that they control the reality of today through that of yesterday, may it be through tradition, social institutions or media. These representations are not believes, which are constructed by each single individual but instead reside in the collective mind, they are shared by many, they are re-cited and re-presented.
To express the concept more simplified, social representations alter an unfamiliar element into a familiar one.
The role of the individual
But this transition of the unfamiliar to familiar is set in motion by each individual’s thought processes of anchoring and objectifying.
- Anchoring: It compares a foreign object to already known systems or categories and classifies it, namely sets it in a familiar context. Individuals do that either by generalizing or particularizing information. In the first case, they select randomly a feature and use it as a category. Thus this feature is also attributed to all the members of this category. In the second case of particularization, they consider a specific feature as a deviation to the norm and try to identify its distinctions in comparison to the already classified prototypes. For example, the image of a psychoanalyst is connected with features of wealth, status and relentlessness (generalization). But these features can also be modified to produce a paradigm of the american psychoanalyst (particularization).
- Objectification; This process combines – or even better, saturates - the unfamiliar idea with the reality. In this process the concept loses its abstract character and acquires “an almost physical, independent existence.” During objectification, the foreign idea adopts an iconic quality and is therefore easier understood and perceived. Political or other authorities often take advantage of this process to lead the masses, since the crowd thinks and is manipulated through images.
Both processes (anchoring and objectifying) can be perceived as ways of handling memory. The first puts in and takes out objects, events or people and allocates them according to their type; the second draws images from the known categorization and unifies them with unknown concepts.
In a way anchoring is inner-directed (the individual makes the classification alone) while objectifying is other-directed (the unification is made by a leading figure or the media).
Food for thought
As noticed, individuals and groups produce and communicate representations themselves. They start discussions, comment on certain topics according to their personal interests and spread information among them horizontally. On the other hand though, they reproduce material provided by their social environment, namely family, tradition, school and media. Under this perspective one could presume that the public receives the ideas as ‘food for thought’, which are unconsciously absorbed and re-created.
Since the involvement of mass media in everyday life is very prominent, it is logical to assume, that their role in providing this ‘food for thought’ is profound. The massive production, that mass media bring, is not considered “…in terms of size, but of an instant inclusive embrace.” Indeed mass media do not just provide a vast variety of subjects to the public, but mostly accomplish to uniform it and thus create a passive mass of consumers – not necessarily of products but also of ideas. Culture, as Niklas Luhmann said, is a product of mass media.
Concluding social Representations
By introducing the theory of social representations, we observed the thought processes of individuals and groups, which guide them to “…construct a stable, predictable world out of such diversity.” Social representations help us understand, that this tendency to conformity is on the one hand an inner-directed procedure, which is subconsciously executed from the individual. Namely, the attention of a person is orientated according to her own thoughts and morals.
But it is on the other hand an outer-directed procedure. Society is in such way constructed, that this outer-directed process has a fundamental role in the social structure. Political parties have a representative leading figure, tradition is connected with a nostalgic feeling, the media are present in almost every part of the private and public sphere and so on. Society is full of outer-directed sources, which provide people thoughts and morals to reproduce. Understanding how individuals recreate knowledge is also an introductory step to fully comprehend how to attract its interest.
Social Representations in the blogosphere
Malcolm Gladwell in his ‘tipping point’ suggests that in order to make an information ’sticky’, to make remain in the mind of the receiver, one should not necessarily change its content, but instead its package. What does all this mean for social media?
- Social represantations is a study of social psychology, which helps us see how we unconsciously think. We adopt behaviors and ideas from our environment. That’s one of the reasons why popular blogs become more popular: If everybody is reading it, then we suppose it is worth reading.
- Social represantations also tell us that the image of an object can have an impact on people, an impact so strong, that can influence their views about a subject, a person, a topic, a blog.
- Finally, social represantations also tell us that the thought process of the human brain is extremely complicated. A blogger might to do everything correctly to get heard in the blogosphere and still pass unnoticed. The context a blog is set can make a difference and this is something that the administrator cannot influence.
[The same content, but written for print. What's easier to read? 11/12/2007]
How does an individual categorize information; how does she recreate knowledge? Introducing the basic mental functions of people, how they manage information, will show us why they choose a certain content over another. Taking this assumption one step further (maybe with the risk of taking it too far), I will try to explain what makes content so interesting. Social representations are a part of the studies of social psychology and were first introduced in the scientific community in the 1960s from Serge Moscovici. He mentions that social representations have two roles. First they make objects, persons or events we encounter conventional. This is a form of categorization, where people ascribe objects to certain models. The association of communism with the color red is an example. When a new element does not conform to a specific type, we then “…constrain it to assume given form, to enter a given category, in fact to become identical to the others, at the risk of its being neither understood nor decoded.” Additionally, representations are – as the author describes – prescriptive, meaning “they impose themselves upon us with an irresistible force.” Their power comes exactly from the fact, that they control the reality of today through that of yesterday, may it be through tradition, social institutions or media. These representations are not believes, which are constructed by each single individual but instead reside in the collective mind, they are shared by many, they are re-cited and re-presented. To express the concept more simplified, social representations alter an unfamiliar element into a familiar one. But this transition of the unfamiliar to familiar is set in motion by each individual’s thought processes of anchoring and objectifying.
- Anchoring: It compares a foreign object to already known systems or categories and classifies it, namely sets it in a familiar context. Individuals do that either by generalizing or particularizing information. In the first case, they select randomly a feature and use it as a category. Thus this feature is also attributed to all the members of this category. In the second case of particularization, they consider a specific feature as a deviation to the norm and try to identify its distinctions in comparison to the already classified prototypes. For example, the image of a psychoanalyst is connected with features of wealth, status and relentlessness (generalization). But these features can also be modified to produce a paradigm of the american psychoanalyst (particularization).
- Objectification; This process combines – or even better, saturates - the unfamiliar idea with the reality. In this process the concept loses its abstract character and acquires “an almost physical, independent existence.” During objectification, the foreign idea adopts an iconic quality and is therefore easier understood and perceived. Political or other authorities often take advantage of this process to lead the masses, since the crowd thinks and is manipulated through images. Both processes (anchoring and objectifying) can be perceived as ways of handling memory. The first puts in and takes out objects, events or people and allocates them according to their type; the second draws images from the known categorization and unifies them with unknown concepts. In a way anchoring is inner-directed (the individual makes the classification alone) while objectifying is other-directed (the unification is made by a leading figure or the media).
As noticed, individuals and groups produce and communicate representations themselves. They start discussions, comment on certain topics according to their personal interests and spread information among them horizontally. On the other hand though, they reproduce material provided by their social environment, namely family, tradition, school and media. Under this perspective one could presume that the public receives the ideas as ‘food for thought’, which are unconsciously absorbed and re-created. Since the involvement of mass media in everyday life is very prominent, it is logical to assume, that their role in providing this ‘food for thought’ is profound. The massive production, that mass media bring, is not considered “…in terms of size, but of an instant inclusive embrace.” Indeed mass media do not just provide a vast variety of subjects to the public, but mostly accomplish to uniform it and thus create a passive mass of consumers – not necessarily of products but also of ideas. Culture, as Niklas Luhmann said, is a product of mass media. By introducing the theory of social representations, we observed the thought processes of individuals and groups, which guide them to “…construct a stable, predictable world out of such diversity.” Social representations help us understand, that this tendency to conformity is on the one hand an inner-directed procedure, which is subconsciously executed from the individual. Namely, the attention of a person is orientated according to her own thoughts and morals. But it is on the other hand an outer-directed procedure. Society is in such way constructed, that this outer-directed process has a fundamental role in the social structure. Political parties have a representative leading figure, tradition is connected with a nostalgic feeling, the media are present in almost every part of the private and public sphere and so on. Society is full of outer-directed sources, which provide people thoughts and morals to reproduce. Understanding how individuals recreate knowledge is also an introductory step to fully comprehend how to attract its interest. Malcolm Gladwell in his ‘tipping point’ suggests that in order to make an information ’sticky’, to make remain in the mind of the receiver, one should not necessarily change its content, but instead its package. What does all this mean for social media?
- Concentrate on your about page (unlike me): it is completely different to say you are 4% neurotic (although your friends say its more) and to say that you are an executive producer of Hollywood or a manager in Google. Your about page gives you credibility.
- Concentrate on the design of the blog (unlike me): It gives a first impression of the blog and shows your engagement to it.
To conclude Social represantations is a study of social psychology, which helps us see how we unconsciously think. We adopt behaviors and ideas from our environment. That’s one of the reasons why popular blogs become more popular: If everybody is reading it, then we suppose it is worth reading. Social represantations also tell us that the image of an object can have an impact on people, an impact so strong, that can influence their views about a subject, a person, a topic, a blog. Finally, social represantations also tell us that the thought process of the human brain is extremely complicated. A blogger might to do everything correctly to get heard in the blogosphere and still pass unnoticed. The context a blog is set can make a difference and this is something that the administrator cannot influence.
