Abstract
One of the most frequently mentioned quotes in social representations literature is Serge Moscovici’s claim that the “purpose of all representations is to make something unfamiliar, or unfamiliarity itself, familiar” (1984/2001, 37). This short quote not only highlights the importance of sense-making activities but also implies the active role of social actors in understanding their worlds: the familiar is always familiar to somebody, and there is no familiarity in itself. Consequently, Moscovici concludes, a social representation of an object tells more about a group’s identity than about the nature of this object. Social representations denote what “the group thinks of itself in its relationships with the objects which affect it” (Durkheim 1895/1982, 40; cf. Moscovici and Vignaux 1994/2001, 158). Our membership in social groups constrains the ways in which we come to understand an object, and conversely, by positioning oneself with regard to an object and by the style we communicate about it, we ascertain our belonging to a particular group of people, and simultaneously distance ourselves from others (cf. Duveen and Lloyd 1986). “Just as the water level in communicating vessels changes when the content is altered at only one point, the act of categorizing an object similarly places the individual in his or her rightful place, like a bilateral lever arm whose axis is fixed in the social field common to both” (Wagner and Hayes 2005, 207; cf. Clémence 2001; Harré and van Langenhove 1999).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ahn, W.-K., C. Kalish, S. A. Gelman, D. L. Medin, C. Luhmann, S. Atran, J. D. Coley, et al. 2001. Why essences are essential in the psychology of concepts. Cognition 82 (1): 59–69.
Andrews, L. B. 1999. Genetic predictions and social responses. In Life science. Ars Electronica 99, ed. G. Stocker and C. Schöpf, 16–17. Vienna: Springer.
Atran, S. 1990. Cognitive foundations of natural history—towards an anthropology of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beck, U. 1986. Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne [Risk society. On the way to a different modernity]. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Berger, P. 1973. On the obsolescence of the concept of honour. In The homeless mind, ed. P. Berger, B. Merger, and H. Kellner, 78–89. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
Birkland, T. A. 1998. Focusing events, mobilization and agenda setting. Journal of Public Policy 1 (1): 53–74.
Bohnsack, R. 2000. Rekonstruktive Sozialforschung. Einführung in Methodologie und Praxis qualitativer Forschung [Reconstructive social research. Introduction to methodology and practice of qualitative research]. 4th ed. Opladen, Germany: Leske and Budrich.
Breakwell, G. M. 2001. Social representational constraints upon identity processes. In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 271–84. Oxford: Blackwell.
Brewer, M. B. 2001. Social identities and social representations: A question of priority? In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 305–11. Oxford: Blackwell.
Clémence, A. 2001. Social positions and social representations. In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 83–95. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cohen, J. J. 1996. Monster culture (seven theses). In Monster theory. Reading culture, ed. J. J. Cohen. London: University of Minnesota Press.
Donnellan, K. S. 1962. Necessity and criteria. Journal of Philosophy 59 (22): 647–58.
Durkheim, E. 1895/1982. The rules of sociological method. London: Macmillan.
Duveen, G. 2001. Representations, identities, resistance. In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 257–70. Oxford: Blackwell.
Duveen, G., and B. Lloyd. 1986. The significance of social identities. British Journal of Social Psychology 25 (3): 219–30.
Gaskell, G., and M. W. Bauer, eds. 2001. Biotechnology 1996–2000. The years of controversy. London: Science Museum.
Gaskell, G., N. Allum, W. Wagner, T. H. Nielsen, E. Jelsoe, M. Kohring, and M. Bauer. 2001. In the public eye: Representations of biotechnology in Europe. In Biotechnology 1996–2000. The years of controversy, ed. G. Gaskell and M. Bauer, 53–79. London: Science Museum.
Grabner, P., and N. Kronberger. 2003. “… aber ich sage: ‘das was ich esse, das bin ich,’ nicht?”: Widerstand gegen gentechnisch veränderte Nahrungsmittel im Kontext von Identitätsfragen [“… but I say: ‘I am what I eat,’ ain’t I?”: Resistance towards genetically modified food in the context of identity concerns]. SWS-Rundschau 43 (1): 129–52.
Habermas, J. 2001. Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur. Auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik? [The future of human nature. Towards a liberal eugenics?]. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Harré, R., and L. van Langenhove. 1999. Positioning theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Haslam, N. 2006. Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (3): 252–64.
Hutchby, I., and R. Wooffitt. 1998. Conversation analysis. Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity.
Kronberger, N. 2007. Moralities we live by: Moral focusing in the context of technological change. In Meaning in action—construction, narratives and representations, ed. T. Sugiman, K. Gergen, and W. Wagner. New York: Springer.
Kronberger, N., U. Dahinden, A. Allansdottir, N. Seger, U. Pfenning, G. Gaskell, N. Allum, et al. 2001. “The train departed without us”—Public perceptions of biotechnology in ten European countries. Notizie di Politeia 17 (62): 26–36.
Lübbe, H. 1993. Sicherheit. Risikowahrnehmung im Zivilisationsprozeß [Safety. The perception of risk in the civilization process]. In Risiko ist ein Konstrukt. Wahrnehmungen zur Risikowahrnehmung, ed. Bayerische Rück, 23–42. Munich: Knesebeck.
Marková, I. 2000. Amédée or how to get rid of it: Social representations from a dialogical perspective. Culture & Psychology 6 (4): 419–60.
Medin, D. L., and A. Ortony. 1989. Psychological essentialism. In Similarity and analogical reasoning, ed. S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony, 179–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moloney, G., and I. Walker. 2002. Talking about transplants: Social representations and the dialectical, dilemmatic nature of organ donation and transplantation. British Journal of Social Psychology 41 (2): 299–320.
Moscovici, S. 1984/2001. The phenomenon of social representations. In Social representations. Explorations in social psychology, ed. S. Moscovici and G. Duveen, 18–77. New York: New York University Press.
Moscovici, S., and G. Vignaux. 1994/2001. The concept of themata. In Social representations. Explorations in social psychology, ed. G. Duveen, 156–83. New York: New York University Press.
Nerlich, B., D. D. Clarke, and R. Dingwall. 2000. Clones and crops: The use of stock characters and word play in two debates about bioengineering. Metaphor and Symbol 15 (4): 223–39.
Quine, W. V. 1969. Ontological relativity and other essays. New York: Columbia University Press.
Reicher, S. 2004. The context of social identity: Domination, resistance, and change. Political Psychology 25 (6): 921–45.
Reicher, S., C. Cassidy, I. Wolpert, N. Hopkins, and M. Levine. 2006. Saving Bulgaria’s Jews: An analysis of social identity and the mobilisation of social solidarity. European Journal of Social Psychology 36 (1): 49–72.
Rothbart, M., and M. Taylor. 1992. Category labels and social reality: Do we view social categories as natural kinds? In Language, interaction and social cognition, ed. G. R. Semin and K. Fiedler, 11–36. London: Sage.
Rozin, P. 2005. The meaning of “natural”: Process more important than content. Psychological Science 16 (8): 652–58.
Torgersen, H., C. Egger, P. Grabner, N. Kronberger, F. Seifert, P. Weger, and W. Wagner. 2001. Austria: Narrowing the gap with Europe. In Biotechnology 1996–2000. The years of controversy, ed. G. Gaskell and M. Bauer, 131–44. London: Science Museum.
Torgersen, H., J. Hampel, M.-L. Bergmann-Winberg, E. Bridgman, J. Durant, E. Einsiedel, B. Fjaestad, et al. 2002. Promise, problems and proxies: Twenty-five years of debate and regulation in Europe. In Biotechnology. The making of a global controversy, ed. M. W. Bauer and G. Gaskell, 21–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wagner, W., and N. Hayes. 2005. Everyday discourse and common sense: The theory of social representations. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wagner, W., N. Kronberger, S. Berg, and H. Torgersen. 2006. The monster in the public imagination. In Genomics & society: Legal, ethical and social dimensions, ed. G. Gaskell and M. Bauer, 150–68. London: Earthscan.
Wagner, W., N. Kronberger, G. Gaskell, A. Allansdottir, N. Allum, S. Cheveigné, U. Dahinden, C. Diego, L. Montali, A. T. Mortensen, U. Pfenning et al. 2001. Nature in disorder: The troubled public of biotechnology. In Biotechnology 1996–2000. The years of controversy, ed. G. Gaskell and M. Bauer, 80–95. London: Science Museum.
Wagner, W., N. Kronberger, M. Nagata, and R. Sen. Forthcoming. The monstrosity effect across cultures: Affective entailments of cognizing violations of animal kind essence.
Wagner, W., N. Kronberger, and F. Seifert. 2002. Collective symbolic coping with new technology: Knowledge, images and public discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology 41 (3): 323–43.
Wagner, W., H. Torgersen, F. Seifert, P. Grabner, and S. Lehner. 1998. Austria. In Biotechnology in the public sphere: A European sourcebook, ed. J. Durant, G. Gaskell, and M. Bauer, 15–28. London: Science Museum.
Zavalloni, M. 2001. E-motional memory and the identity system: Its interplay with representations of the social world. In Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions, ed. K. Deaux and G. Philogène, 285–304. Oxford: Blackwell.
Zittoun, T., G. Duveen, A. Gillespie, G. Ivinson, and C. Psaltis. 2003. The use of symbolic resources in developmental transitions. Culture & Psychology 9 (4): 415–48.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2007 Gail Moloney and Iain Walker
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kronberger, N., Wagner, W. (2007). Inviolable Versus Alterable Identities. In: Moloney, G., Walker, I. (eds) Social Representations and Identity. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230609181_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230609181_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-53829-4
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-60918-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)