societal psychology session 5: social institutions

1. SOCIETAL PSYCHOLOGYSESSION 5: SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS OVERVIEW: What are Social Institutions? Theoretical Ideas on Social Institutions Social Psychological Functionalist Social Institutions & Power Social Institutions as Bureaucracies Professions & Power The Physical Setting of Organisations Erving Goffman & Total Institutions

3. 1. What are Social Institutions ? “…an institution is a set of rules that structure social interactions in particular ways… for a set of rules to be an institution, knowledge of these rules must be shared by members of the relevant community or society.” (Knight, 2004, p.2) We are all affected by many different social institutions. They determine our social behaviour and experiences, our hopes and aspirations and our roles in society.

4. 1. What are Social Institutions? Sociologists suggest that the following basic social institutions are found in all societies: Economic – through which goods/services are produced and distributed Political – deals with authoritative allocation of public social goals and values e.g. government, legal Family/Kinship - which tend to deal with procreation, marriage, the family, the extended family and socialisation of the young Education – socialisation & preparation for citizenship Health – deals with health & healing Religion – which deals with the promotion of personal meaning and understanding of ultimate concerns e.g. church In some societies we could also add social welfare institutions –which deal with the provision of support to sustain or attain social functioning and a higher quality of life. SEE NOTE ON HANDOUT RE PORTFOLIO: For your portfolio assignment Section 3 on Social Institutions you are asked to discuss the role of power in ‘care’ institutions. Care institutions in this sense encompass health institutions such as hospitals, day care centres, mental health institutions, homes for visually impaired and/or people with other disabilities; and other types of institutions e.g. social welfare institutions such as homes for the care of children and the elderly. It could also include prisons and young offender units (political/educational institutions).SEE NOTE ON HANDOUT RE PORTFOLIO: For your portfolio assignment Section 3 on Social Institutions you are asked to discuss the role of power in ‘care’ institutions. Care institutions in this sense encompass health institutions such as hospitals, day care centres, mental health institutions, homes for visually impaired and/or people with other disabilities; and other types of institutions e.g. social welfare institutions such as homes for the care of children and the elderly. It could also include prisons and young offender units (political/educational institutions).

5. 2. CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS Their primary objective is the satisfaction of specific social needs – they have multiple functions to perform 2. They embody the values shared by their members e.g. U.K. government institutional values include democracy, open elections, equality before the law etc. 3. They are relatively permanent – behavioural patterns established within them become tradition, e.g. monogamy in marriage in western societies (exception – Mormon) 4. Their activities occupy a central place in society – drastic change in one is likely to produce changes in others e.g. recession periods in economic institutions may affect jobs, stability of family life, quality of education, ability of government to provide necessary services Please fill in examples for each characteristic from lecturePlease fill in examples for each characteristic from lecture

6. 2. CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS 5. They are interdependent within a society – each institution is structured/organised around expected set of norms, values, statuses, rules, groups, organisations and behaviours, e.g. educational institutions contain school systems, teachers, administrators etc. and have become extremely bureaucratic. High value placed on learning, accumulation of knowledge, achieving high grades, good study skills and co-operating with teachers/fellow pupils. 6. Their ideals are generally accepted by the majority of a society even if they don’t participate in the institution e.g. a bachelor may agree with the function that marriage serves in society even though he chooses to stay apart from traditional structure. 7. They usually involve authority/power over someone else – hierarchy of power e.g. education authority - head teacher – heads of year/subjects – teachers – teaching assistants - pupils Add examples in spaces on handoutAdd examples in spaces on handout

7. Social Institutions must deal with at least the following universal issues: Procreation – new generation Sexual access and regulation of sexual norms – through approved institutions e.g. marriage Care of the young – fed, clothed, protected Socialisation – way of life, in particular culture must be passed on Education – information passed on

8. Religion – deal with questions about origins and meaning of life/death Distribution of power – agreement that designated persons will exercise accumulated authority in the name of those in the group Production, distribution and consumption of goods – material needs of members. Decisions made. Social control – provide legitimate forums for disagreements and specify punishments/ threats of punishments

9. 3. Theoretical Ideas on Social Institutions i. Deutsch (1985) - Social Psychological Suggested 4 fundamental bipolar ‘psychological dimensions’ of interpersonal relationships in social institutions 1. Co-operation vs. Competition 2. Power Distribution (equal vs unequal) 3. Task-orientated vs. Social-emotional 4. Formal vs. Informal

10. Deutsch – psychological dimensions 1. Co-operation vs. Competition Co-operative systems - those in which individuals (or units) have interdependent goals, shared values, positive interrelatedness, sense of accountability to group, shared responsibility for one another and for maintenance of system, e.g. kibbutzim, worker owned co-operatives. Competitive systems - individuals have negatively linked goals, Common scale for measuring success (compared to others), emphasis on struggling to determine winners/losers and responsibility/accountability only for oneself e.g. education system, employees in traditional firms Add examples to handoutAdd examples to handout

11. Deutsch – psychological dimensions 2. Power Distribution (equal vs. unequal) Egalitarian – power shared, equal access to information, education, equal opportunity to influence decisions, equal rights/vote, and equal access to economic resources/consumer goods. (often also co-operative) Hierarchical – power distributed unevenly, greater power to those higher in hierarchy. (often also competitive

12. Deutsch – psychological dimensions 3. Task-orientated vs. Social-emotional Task orientated - Production-oriented, economic-oriented institutions Socio-emotional - Families, friendship groups 4. Formal vs. Informal Informal relationship - definitions of activities, times and locations are left largely to participants e.g. social clubs Formal relationships – social rules/norms largely determine interactions. e.g. bureaucracy – formal regulations (Merton, 1957).

13. II. Functionalist Theories Examines institutions of society in terms of contribution to the maintenances of whole social system – often referred to as systems theory Society has functional pre-requisites – basic needs necessary for existence. Institutional arrangements such as education and family meet needs that are common to all societies e.g. Murdock (1949) family exists in all societies. But can’t be assumed that social institutions perform same functions in all societies Functionalist theories propose that: In any system made of interconnected parts there must be integration between these parts or a degree of fit. Social norms derived from same basic societal values structure behaviour in institutions of society, e.g. function of the family is to ensure continuity by reproduction and socialisation of new members: function of religion is to integrate social system by reinforcing common values

14. Functionalist theories a) Durkheim (1893) How can consensus be achieved in society? By consensus – ‘collective consciousness’ – common beliefs/sentiments shared by all. For example, function of division of labour (through economic institutions) in modern society is social integration of individuals, achieved through performance of a variety of complementary roles, tasks. This brings about: SOCIAL SOLIDARITY (moral order) – impossible without consensus

15. Functionalist theories Criticisms: Functional unity of social institutions is doubtful e.g. society with various religious faiths, religion may divide, not unite. Any part of society may be functional, dysfunctional or non-functional No justification for assuming that family, religion etc. are necessary to all societies but functional alternatives may replace social institutions in some societies e.g. communism (replace religion)

16. 4. Social Institutions & Power i). What is Power? Power is generally defined by social scientists as the ability to impose one’s will on others, even in the face of resistance. "By power is meant every opportunity/possibility existing within a social relationship, which permits one to carry out one's own will, even against resistance, and regardless of the basis on which this opportunity rests." (Weber, 1946)

17. i). What is Power? Power is relational – saying that one person/party ‘has power’ implies other people/parties in the relationship Power operates reciprocally – to have power over others, one must control things they desire or deem necessary but with this nearly always comes reverse control (to a lesser, equal or greater extent), e.g. an employer controls wages, working conditions, promotion etc. but an employee can control whether they leave that employment, have more or less commitment to the job, form/join a union Balance of power - Because power is both relational & reciprocal there is always a ‘balance of power’ – all parties to all relationships have some form of power

18. ii). Michel Foucault (1980) Power and knowledge inextricably linked: Foucault claims belief systems (such as those in social institutions) gain momentum (and hence power) as more people come to accept the particular views associated with that belief system as common knowledge. Belief systems define their figures of authority, such as medical doctors, teachers or priests Within belief systems (or discourse*) ideas crystallize as to what is right and what is wrong, what is normal and what is deviant - certain views, thoughts or actions become unthinkable. These undeniable "truths", come to define a particular way of seeing the world, and the particular way of life associated with such "truths" becomes normalised. Resistance, through defiance, defines power and hence becomes possible through power. Without resistance, power is absent Discourse - In the social sciences, a discourse is considered to be an institutionalized way of thinking, a social boundary defining what can be said about a specific topic.Discourse - In the social sciences, a discourse is considered to be an institutionalized way of thinking, a social boundary defining what can be said about a specific topic.

19. Foucault – Power & Knowledge "...in a society such as ours...there are manifold relations of power that permeate, characterize and constitute the social body, and these relations of power cannot themselves be established, consolidated nor implemented without the production, accumulation, circulation and functioning of a discourse." (Foucault, 1980)

20. iii) Max Weber & Social Power (1948) - Power is legitimised by authority Three Models of Authority: Charismatic – derives from devotion felt by subordinates for leader believed to have exceptional qualities e.g. Napoleon, Fidel Castro. Also teachers, managers may use charisma for power. Traditional – belief in established customs and traditions. Obedience based on traditional status (usually inherited). Loyalty and obligation to positions of power e.g. royalty, nobles Rational-legal – based on acceptance of impersonal rules. Others accept legal framework supporting authority e.g. judge, tax inspector, military commander. Rules which authority based on are rational in that constructed for goal attainment and way to attain it e.g. laws to achieve goal of ‘justice’. Weber believed that rational-legal authority produced bureaucracies

21. 5. Social Institutions as Bureaucracies: Bureaucracies as most efficient form of organisation - (Weber 1864-1920) de Gournay coined the term "bureaucracy" (18th century) referring to large organisations According to Weber, all large-scale organisations tend to be bureaucratic in nature. Bureaucracies are particular types of social institutions and can be considered as social systems. Depts. of state, political parties, business enterprises, military, education, health care, churches may all be organised as bureaucracies.

22. Weber’s Theory (‘Ideal Type’) of Bureaucracy (re-published 1968) Hierarchy - clear-cut administrative hierarchy, ordered system of superordination and subordination; every position is accountable to and supervised by a higher office. Specialisation – official tasks and positions clearly divided each covering distinct and separate area of competence. Rules – consistent system of activities and mutual relations regulated by rules (written and extensively defined) not personal feelings towards colleagues/clients. Little room for personal initiative/discretion. Impersonality – everyone within the organisation subject to formal equality of treatment. Officials – (full-time and salaried) selected on the basis of technical qualifications (or clearly recognised criteria). Individuals expected to make career within organisation. Promotion possible on basis of capability, seniority, or mixture of two (objective criteria).

23. Ideal Type of Bureacracy - Weber Public-private division – clear separation between official activity and private life. No members of organisation own the resources with which they operate – separation of workers from means of production. Unlike traditional communities (e.g. farmers, craft workers, controlled processes of production, owned tools they used), workers do not own offices they work in, desks they sit at etc. These bureaucratic tendencies flourished under modern Western capitalism but they were not new, previously found in ancient Egypt, China, & Roman Empire. Effect of increasing bureaucracy was to advance a process Weber called ‘ the disenchantment of the world’ (the removal of all sense of mystery or meaning from life, reducing it to mundane, routine) See Criticism’s on handout – Merton, doing things by the book prevents innovation & Gouldner Read also: Bureacracy & Democracy – surveillance society and infringement of democracy and example of the Japanese opposite to bureaucracies – e.g. bottom-up decision making, job security, etc.See Criticism’s on handout – Merton, doing things by the book prevents innovation & Gouldner Read also: Bureacracy & Democracy – surveillance society and infringement of democracy and example of the Japanese opposite to bureaucracies – e.g. bottom-up decision making, job security, etc.

24. 5. Professions & Power Barber (1963) – functionalist view Four essential attributes of professions: Systematic/generalised knowledge applied to variety of problems e.g. doctors Concern for interests of community rather than self interest (altruism). Strictly controlled by code of ethics established and maintained by professional qualifications and learned as part of training e.g. Hippocratic Oath (doctors), BPS ethical standards (psychologists) High rewards in terms of earnings/prestige reflect value of contribution to society Criticisms - Do they make important contribution to society as whole? - Do they serve all members of society rather than particular groups? - Are they concerned for interests of society (altruistic) or self concerned Criticisms - Do they make important contribution to society as whole? - Do they serve all members of society rather than particular groups? - Are they concerned for interests of society (altruistic) or self concerned

25. 5. Professions & Power Parry & Parry, 1976 – Weberian perspective 1. Restricted entry into professions – control of training, qualifications required and numbers deemed necessary – this maintains high demand for services and gains high rewards 2. Professional associations promote view that professional conduct above reproach/committed to public service. They discipline their own members – in order to prevent scrutiny and maintain image? 3. Claim that only members qualified to provide services. Often reinforced by law – e.g. solicitors monopoly on particular services. Therefore professions can control rival occupational groups which might threaten their dominance. Conclusions: read handout

26. Michel Foucault’s Theory of Organizations: The Control of Time and Space (1970, 1979) Foucault believed that the structure and architecture of an organisation influenced the social make-up and practices within. For example, in assembly-line production, the workers are quite often in large open rooms so that they can be seen by their superiors, ensuring that their job is being done. Their visibility determines how easily those who are not in charge can be subject to what Foucault called surveillance.

27. 6. The Physical Setting of Organizations Two kinds of surveillance: 1. Direct surveillance - as in classrooms where the teacher instructs the class. 2. Surveillance by written records - Records are kept as evaluations to regulate how one is performing and to monitor behaviour. Examples: High school and college reports Timetables ensure that a person's duty within an organisation is being carried out. They regulate activities across time and space. In Foucault's words, they "efficiently distribute bodies" around the organisation, e.g. universities timetables for lecture periods.

28. Foucault was especially interested in prisons, commenting on the fact that prisons resemble other organisations like "factories, barracks, [and] hospitals." According to Foucault (1975) the modern prison originated from a design by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) in the 1800's. It was called "Panopticon" (all seeing) and was a prison designed for maximum surveillance. [see http://cartome.org/panopticon1.htm for further info]

29. Prisons & Surveillance:

30. "Hence the major effect of the Panopticon: to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power.” (Foucault, 1975) Prisons designed exactly like Panopticon never materialised but consider ‘Supermax’ prisons in U.S.A. in terms of maximum surveillance. See link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermax for further brief description.

31. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: Symbolic Interactionist approach “A total institution may be defined as a place of residence and work where a large number of like-situated individuals, cut off from the wider society for an appreciable period of time, together lead an enclosed, formally administered round of life”

32. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: “Every institution captures something of the time and interest of its members and provides something of a world for them; in brief, every institution has encompassing tendencies…Their encompassing or total character is symbolised by the barrier to social intercourse with the outside and to departure that is often built right into the physical plant, such as locked doors, high walls, barbed wire, cliffs, water, forests, or moors. These establishments I am calling total institutions, and it is their general characteristics I want to explore.”

33. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: Goffman (1968) suggested that ‘total institutions’ can be grouped in the following 5 ways: Institutions established to care for persons felt to be both incapable and harmless; these are the homes for the blind, the aged, the orphaned, and the poor. Places established to care for persons felt to be incapable of looking after themselves and a threat to the community, albeit an unintended one: TB sanitaria, mental hospitals. Institutions organised to protect the community against what are felt to be intentional dangers to it, with the welfare of the persons in these institutions not the immediate issue: jails, penitentiaries, P.O.W. camps, and concentration camps.

34. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: 4. Institutions supposedly established to pursue work-like tasks and justifying themselves only on these instrumental grounds: army barracks, ships, boarding schools, work camps, colonial compounds, and large mansions from the point of view of those who live in the servants' quarters. 5. Establishments designed as retreats from the world even while often serving also as training stations for the religious; examples are abbeys, monasteries, convents, and other cloisters.

35. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: Whilst individuals in modern society typically sleep, play and work in different places with different co-participants, under different authorities, and without an over-all rational plan - the central feature of total institutions is a breakdown of the barriers ordinarily separating these three spheres of life. In that, All aspects of life are conducted in the same place and under the same central authority. Each phase of the member's daily activity is carried on in the immediate company of a large batch of others, all of whom are treated alike and required to do the same thing together.

36. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: All phases of the day's activities are tightly scheduled, with one activity leading at a prearranged time into the next, the whole sequence of activities being imposed from above by a system of explicit formal rulings and a body of officials. Finally, the various enforced activities are brought together into a single rational plan purportedly designed to fulfil the official aims of the institution Some of these characteristics could be found in other places e.g. family but not usually regimented and not necessarily carried out in immediate company of similar others…

37. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: Inmate World within Total Institutions: Typical for inmates to come with a “presenting culture” derived from a “home world” Integration into total institution may entail a kind of “disculturation” or “untraining” which makes it difficult for person to adjust to old way of life once they leave the institution. Can create tensions between total institution and home. Admission to total institution may entail “trimming” or “programming” where new arrival [allows him/herself] to be shaped and coded into an object that can be fed into administrative machinery of establishment.  Examples ??? Own clothing replaced with institution uniform e.g. hospital gown, prison clothes (not always done in all prisons now), army uniform, hair cut (prison & army), school uniform – also convents, monasteries ?? Training programmes – army, prisonOwn clothing replaced with institution uniform e.g. hospital gown, prison clothes (not always done in all prisons now), army uniform, hair cut (prison & army), school uniform – also convents, monasteries ?? Training programmes – army, prison

38. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: May involve “obedience tests” at outset Possessions are taken; and with that one’s sense of self Stripped of “usual” appearance May suffer personal self defacement; stripped of one’s “identity kit” Certain movements, postures, and stances will convey lowly images of the individual - examples?? Physical stance – required to hold body in humiliating pose; perform verbal acts of deference (e.g., saying “sir”, begging, humbly asking for little things like permission to drink water) Doffing cap gesture, avoiding eye contact, bowing, backing away, saluting etc. Servants speaking only when spoken to.Doffing cap gesture, avoiding eye contact, bowing, backing away, saluting etc. Servants speaking only when spoken to.

39. 7. Erving Goffman & Total Institutions: Conclusions: Total institution strips person of belief that they have any command over their world; that they are individuals with “adult” self determination, autonomy, and freedom of action. Inmates must show internalisation of the views held by the institution’s staff Inmate’s use of speech also shows their personal lack of self efficacy External Mortification (humiliation) is complimented by self/internal mortification Mortification is officially rationalised in terms of sanitation, security, ‘it’s for your own good’. Demonstrates importance of power in some contemporary social institutions e.g. mental hospitals, care homes for elderly and children, youth offender hostels etc.