Socialization

Socialization (or socialisation) is a term used by sociologists, social

psychologists, anthropologists, political scientists and educationalists to refer to the

lifelong process of inheriting and disseminating norms, customs and ideologies,

providing an individual with the skills and habits necessary for participating within his or

her own society. Socialization is thus ‘the means by which social and cultural continuity

are attained’.[1][2]

Socialization describes a process which may lead to desirable, or 'moral', outcomes in

the opinion of said society. Individual views on certain issues, such

asrace or economics, are influenced by the view of the society at large and become a

"normal," and acceptable outlook or value to have within a society. Many socio-political

theories postulate that socialization provides only a partial explanation for human beliefs

and behaviors, maintaining that agents are not 'blank slates' predetermined by their

environment.[3] Scientific research provides some evidence that people might be shaped

by both social influences andgenes.[4][5][6][7] Genetic studies have shown that a

person's environment interacts with his or her genotype to influence behavioral

outcomes.[8]

Contents

  [hide] 

1 Theories

o 1.1 Klaus Hurrelmann

o 1.2 Lawrence Kohlberg

o 1.3 Carol Gilligan

o 1.4 Erik H. Erikson

o 1.5 George Herbert Mead

o 1.6 Judith R. Harris

2 Stages of Socialization

3 Types

4 Social institutions

5 Other uses

6 See also

7 References

8 Further reading

Theories[edit]

Socialization is the process by which human infants begin to acquire the skills

necessary to perform as a functioning member of their society, and is the most

influential learning process one can experience.[9] Unlike other living species, whose

behavior is biologically set, humans need social experiences to learn their culture and to

survive.[10] Although cultural variability manifests in the actions, customs, and behaviors

of whole social groups (societies), the most fundamental expression of culture is found

at the individual level. This expression can only occur after an individual has been

socialized by his or her parents, family, extended family, and extended social networks.

This reflexive process of both learning and teaching is how cultural and social

characteristics attain continuity. Many scientists say socialization essentially represents

the whole process of learning throughout the life course and is a central influence on the

behaviour, beliefs, and actions of adults as well as of children.[11]

Klaus Hurrelmann[edit]

From the late 1980s, sociological and psychological theories have been connected with

the term socialization. One example of this connection is the theory of Klaus

Hurrelmann. In his book "Social Structure and Personality Development" (Hurrelmann

1989/2009), he develops the "Model of Productive Processing of Reality (PPR)." The

core idea is that socialization refers to an individual's personality development. It is the

result of the productive processing of interior and exterior realities. Bodily and mental

qualities and traits constitute a person's inner reality; the circumstances of the social

and physical environment embody the external reality. Reality processing is productive

because human beings actively grapple with their lives and attempt to cope with the

attendant developmental tasks. The success of such a process depends on the

personal and social resources available. Incorporated within all developmental tasks is

the necessity to reconcile personal individuation and social integration and so secure

the "I-dentity." (Hurrelmann1989/2009: 42)

Lawrence Kohlberg[edit]

Lawrence Kohlberg's (1981) theory of moral development studied moral reasoning (how

individuals judge situations as right from wrong) within three stages of young childhood.

The first is the pre-conventional stage, where children experience the world in terms of

pain and pleasure. Second, the conventional stage appears in the teen years of

maturation. Teenagers learn to define right and wrong according to the desires of their

parents and begin to conform to cultural norms resulting in a decrease of selfishness.

The last stage of moral development is the post-conventional level where people move

beyond society's norms and consider abstract ethical principles.[12]

Carol Gilligan[edit]

Carol Gilligan compared the moral development of girls and boys in her theory of

gender and moral development. She claimed (1982, 1990) that boys have a justice

perspective meaning that they rely on formal rules to define right and wrong. Girls, on

the other hand, have a care and responsibility perspective where personal relationships

are considered when judging a situation. Gilligan also studied the effect of gender on

self-esteem. She claimed that society's socialization of females is the reason why girls'

self-esteem diminishes as they grow older. Girls struggle to regain their personal

strength when moving through adolescence as they have fewer female teachers and

most authority figures are men.[13]

Erik H. Erikson[edit]

Erik H. Erikson (1902–1994) explained the challenges throughout the life course. The

first stage in the life course is infancy, where babies learn trust and mistrust. The

second stage is toddlerhood where children around the age of two struggle with the

challenge of autonomy versus doubt. In stage three, preschool, children struggle to

understand the difference between initiative and guilt. Stage four, pre-adolescence,

children learn about industriousness and inferiority. In the fifth stage called

adolescence, teenagers experience the challenge of gaining identity versus confusion.

The sixth stage, young adulthood, is when young people gain insight to life when

dealing with the challenge of intimacy and isolation. In stage seven, or middle

adulthood, people experience the challenge of trying to make a difference (versus self-

absorption). In the final stage, stage eight or old age, people are still learning about the

challenge of integrity and despair.[14]

George Herbert Mead[edit]

George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) developed a theory of social behaviorism to explain

how social experience develops an individual's self-concept. Mead's central concept is

the self: It is composed of self-awareness and self-image. Mead claimed that the self is

not there at birth, rather, it is developed with social experience. Since social experience

is the exchange of symbols, people tend to find meaning in every action. Seeking

meaning leads us to imagine the intention of others. Understanding intention requires

imagining the situation from the others' point of view. In effect, others are a mirror in

which we can see ourselves. Charles Horton Cooley (1902-1983) coined the

term looking glass self, which means self-image based on how we think others see us.

According to Mead the key to developing the self is learning to take the role of the other.

With limited social experience, infants can only develop a sense of identity through

imitation. Gradually children learn to take the roles of several others. The final stage is

the generalized other, which refers to widespread cultural norms and values we use as

a reference for evaluating others.[15]

Judith R. Harris[edit]

Group Socialization.

Judith R. Harris (b. 1938) graduated magna cum laude with her masters degree in

psychology from Harvard University. She received the George A. Miller Award for her

proposed theory of group socialization (GS theory). This theory states that a child’s

adult personality is determined by childhood and adolescent peer groups outside of the

home environment and that “parental behaviors have no effect on the psychological

characteristics their children will have as adults.” Harris proposes this theory based on

behavioral genetics, sociological views of group processes, context-specific learning,

and evolutionary theory.[16] While Harris proposed this theory, she attributes the original

idea to Eleanor E. Maccoby and John A. Martin both of whom are doctors at Standford

University and wrote the chapter on family socialization found in the fourth edition of

the Handbook of Child Psychology. After extensively reviewing the research conducted

on parent-child interactions, Maccoby and Martin (1983) state that their findings suggest

that parental behavior and the home environment has either no effect on the social

development of children, or the effect varies significantly between children.[17]

Behavioral genetics suggest that up to fifty percent of the variance in adult personality is

due to genetic differences.[18] The environment in which a child is raised accounts for

only approximately ten percent in the variance of an adult’s personality.[19] As much as

twenty percent of the variance is due measurement error.[20] This suggests that only a

very small part of an adult’s personality is influenced by factors parents control (i.e. the

home environment). Harris claims that while it’s true that siblings don’t have identical

experiences in the home environment (making it difficult to associate a definite figure to

the variance of personality due to home environments), the variance found by current

methods is so low that researchers should look elsewhere to try to account for the

remaining variance.[16]

Harris also states that developing long-term personality characteristics away from the

home environment would be evolutionarily beneficial because future success is more

likely to depend on interactions with peers than interactions with parents and siblings.

Also, because of already existing genetic similarities with parents, developing

personalities outside of childhood home environments would further diversify

individuals, increasing their evolutionary success.[16]

Stages of Socialization[edit]

Richard Moreland and John Levine (1982)[full citation needed] created a model of group

socialization based upon the assumption that individuals and groups change their

evaluations and commitments to each other over time. Since these changes happen in

all groups, Moreland and Levine speculate that there is a predictable sequence of

stages that occur in order for an individual to transition through a group.

Moreland and Levine identify five stages of socialization which mark this transition;

investigation, socialization, maintenance, resocialization, and remembrance. During

each stage, the individual and the group evaluate each other which leads to an increase

or decrease in commitment to socialization. This socialization pushes the individual from

prospective, new, full, marginal, and ex member.

Stage 1: Investigation This stage is marked by a cautious search for information. The

individual compares groups in order to determine which one will fulfill their needs

(reconnaissance), while the group estimates the value of the potential member

(recruitment). The end of this stage is marked by entry to the group, whereby the group

asks the individual to join and they accept the offer.

Stage 2: Socialization Now that the individual has moved from prospective member to

new member, they must accept the group’s culture. At this stage, the individual accepts

the group’s norms, values, and perspectives (assimilation), and the group adapts to fit

the new member’s needs (accommodation). The acceptance transition point is then

reached and the individual becomes a full member. However, this transition can be

delayed if the individual or the group reacts negatively. For example, the individual may

react cautiously or misinterpret other members’ reactions if they believe that they will be

treated differently as a new comer.

Stage 3: Maintenance During this stage, the individual and the group negotiate what

contribution is expected of members (role negotiation). While many members remain in

this stage until the end of their membership, some individuals are not satisfied with their

role in the group or fail to meet the group’s expectations (divergence).

Stage 4: Resocialization -If the divergence point is reached, the former full member

takes on the role of a marginal member and must be resocialized. There are two

possible outcomes of resocialization: differences are resolved and the individual

becomes a full member again (convergence), or the group expels the individual or the

individual decides to leave (exit).

Stage 5: Remembrance In this stage, former members reminisce about their memories

of the group, and make sense of their recent departure. If the group reaches a

consensus on their reasons for departure, conclusions about the overall experience of

the group become part of the group’s tradition.

Types[edit]

Main article: Primary socialisation

Primary socialization for a child is very important because it sets the ground work for

all future socialization. Primary Socialization occurs when a child learns the attitudes,

values, and actions appropriate to individuals as members of a particular culture. It is

mainly influenced by the immediate family and friends. For example if a child saw

his/her mother expressing a discriminatoryopinion about a minority group, then that

child may think this behavior is acceptable and could continue to have this opinion

about minority groups.

Secondary socialization Secondary socialization refers to the process of learning what

is the appropriate behavior as a member of a smaller group within the larger society.

Basically, it is the behavioral patterns reinforced by socializing agents of society.

Secondary socialization takes place outside the home. It is where children and adults

learn how to act in a way that is appropriate for the situations they are in.[21] Schools

require very different behavior from the home, and Children must act according to new

rules. New teachers have to act in a way that is different from pupils and learn the new

rules from people around them.[21] Secondary Socialization is usually associated with

teenagers and adults, and involves smaller changes than those occurring in primary

socialization. Such examples of Secondary Socialization are entering a new profession

or relocating to a new environment or society.

Anticipatory socialization Anticipatory socialization refers to the processes of

socialization in which a person "rehearses" for future positions, occupations, and social

relationships. For example, a couple might move in together before getting married in

order to try out, or anticipate, what living together will be like.[22] Research by Kenneth J.

Levine and Cynthia A. Hoffner suggests that parents are the main source of anticipatory

socialization in regards to jobs and careers.[23]

Re-socialization Re-socialization refers to the process of discarding former behavior

patterns and reflexes, accepting new ones as part of a transition in one's life. This

occurs throughout the human life cycle.[24] Re-socialization can be an intense

experience, with the individual experiencing a sharp break with his or her past, as well

as a need to learn and be exposed to radically different norms and values. One

common example involves re-socialization through a total institution, or "a setting in

which people are isolated from the rest of society and manipulated by an administrative

staff". Re-socialization via total institutions involves a two step process: 1) the staff work

to root out a new inmate's individual identity & 2) the staff attempt to create for the

inmate a new identity.[25] Other examples of this are the experience of a young man or

woman leaving home to join the military, or a religious convert internalizing the beliefs

and rituals of a new faith. An extreme example would be the process by which

a transsexual learns to function socially in a dramatically altered gender role.

Organizational socialization

Organizational Socialization Chart

Organizational socialization is the process whereby an employee learns the knowledge

and skills necessary to assume his or her organizational role.[26] As newcomers become

socialized, they learn about the organization and its history, values, jargon, culture, and

procedures. This acquired knowledge about new employees' future work environment

affects the way they are able to apply their skills and abilities to their jobs. How actively

engaged the employees are in pursuing knowledge affects their socialization process.[27] They also learn about their work group, the specific people they work with on a daily

basis, their own role in the organization, the skills needed to do their job, and both

formal procedures and informal norms. Socialization functions as a control system in

that newcomers learn to internalize and obey organizational values and practices.

Group socialization Group socialization is the theory that an individual's peer groups,

rather than parental figures, influences his or her personality and behavior in adulthood.[16] Adolescents spend more time with peers than with parents. Therefore, peer groups

have stronger correlations with personality development than parental figures do.[28] For

example, twin brothers, whose genetic makeup are identical, will differ in personality

because they have different groups of friends, not necessarily because their parents

raised them differently.

Entering high school is a crucial moment in many adolescent's lifespan involving the

branching off from the restraints of their parents. When dealing with new life challenges,

adolescents take comfort in discussing these issues within their peer groups instead of

their parents.[29] Peter Grier, staff writer of the Christian Science Monitor describes this

occurrence as,"Call it the benign side of peer pressure. Today's high-schoolers operate

in groups that play the role of nag and nanny-in ways that are both beneficial and

isolating."[30]

Gender socialization Henslin (1999:76) contends that "an important part of

socialization is the learning of culturally defined gender roles." Gender socialization

refers to the learning of behavior and attitudes considered appropriate for a given sex.

Boys learn to be boys and girls learn to be girls. This "learning" happens by way of

many different agents of socialization. The family is certainly important in

reinforcing gender roles, but so are one’s friends, school, work and the mass media.

Gender roles are reinforced through "countless subtle and not so subtle ways"

(1999:76).

As parents are present in a child's life from the beginning, their influence in a child's

early socialization is very important, especially in regards to gender roles. Sociologists

have identified four ways in which parents socialize gender roles in their children:

Shaping gender related attributes through toys and activities, differing their interaction

with children based on the sex of the child, serving as primary gender models, and

communicating gender ideals and expectations.[31]

Racial socialization Racial socialization has been defined as "the developmental

processes by which children acquire the behaviors, perceptions, values, and attitudes of

an ethnic group, and come to see themselves and others as members of the group".[32] The existing literature conceptualizes racial socialization as having multiple

dimensions. Researchers have identified five dimensions that commonly appear in the

racial socialization literature: cultural socialization, preparation for bias, promotion of

mistrust, egalitarianism, and other.[33] Cultural socialization refers to parenting practices

that teach children about their racial history or heritage and is sometimes referred to as

pride development. Preparation for bias refers to parenting practices focused on

preparing children to be aware of, and cope with, discrimination. Promotion of mistrust

refers to the parenting practices of socializing children to be wary of people from other

races. Egalitarianism refers to socializing children with the belief that all people are

equal and should be treated with a common humanity.[33]

Planned socialization Planned socialization occurs when other people take actions

designed to teach or train others—from infancy on.[34]

Natural Socialization Natural socialization occurs when infants and youngsters

explore, play and discover the social world around them. Natural socialization is easily

seen when looking at the young of almost any mammalian species (and some birds).

Planned socialization is mostly a human phenomenon; and all through history, people

have been making plans for teaching or training others. Both natural and planned

socialization can have good and bad features: It is wise to learn the best features of

both natural and planned socialization and weave them into our lives.[34]

Positive socialization Positive socialization is the type of social learning that is based

on pleasurable and exciting experiences. We tend to like the people who fill our social

learning processes with positive motivation, loving care, and rewarding opportunities.[34]

Negative socialization Negative socialization occurs when others use punishment,

harsh criticisms or anger to try to "teach us a lesson;" and often we come to dislike both

negative socialization and the people who impose it on us.[34] There are all types of

mixes of positive and negative socialization; and the more positive social learning

experiences we have, the happier we tend to be—especially if we learn useful

information that helps us cope well with the challenges of life. A high ratio of negative to

positive socialization can make a person unhappy, defeated or pessimistic about life.[34]

Social institutions[edit]

Main article: Institutions

In the social sciences, institutions are the structures and mechanisms of social

order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals within a given

human collectivity. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence,

transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing

of rules governing cooperative human behavior.[35] Types of institution include:

The Family The family is the most important agent of socialization because it is the

center of the child's life, as infants are totally dependent on others. Not all

socialization are intentional, it depends on the surrounding. The most profound

affect is gender socialization, however the family also shoulders the task of teaching

children cultural values and attitudes about themselves and others. Children learn

continuously from the environment that adults create. Children also become aware

of class at a very early age and assign different values to each class accordingly.[36]

Religion  Agents of socialization differ in effects across religious traditions. Some

believe religion is like an ethnic or cultural category, making it less likely for the

individuals to break from religious affiliations and be more socialized in this setting.

Parental religious participation is the most influential part of religious socialization—

more so than religious peers or religious beliefs.[37]

Peer group  A peer group is a social group whose members have interests, social

positions and age in common. This is where children can escape supervision and

learn to form relationships on their own. The influence of the peer group typically

peaks during adolescence however peer groups generally only affect short term

interests unlike the family which has long term influence.[38]

Economic systems  Socialization within an economic system is the process of

learning the consequences of economic decisions. Socialization impacts decisions

regarding "acceptable alternatives for consumption," "social values of consumption

alternatives," the "establishment of dominant values," and "the nature of involvement

in consumption".[39] Unfortunately, one and the same word, Socialization, in this

context is used to describe counterposed phenomena: the growing centralization

and interdependence of capitalist society under the control of an elite; and the

possibility of a democratic, bottom-up control by the majority. Thus, "socialization"

describes two very different ways in which society can become more social: under

capitalism, there is a trend toward a growing centralization and planning that is

eventually global, but takes place from the top down; under socialism, that process

is subjected to democratic control from below by the people and their communities.[40]

Legal systems  Children are pressured from both parents and peers to conform and

obey certain laws or norms of the group/community. Parents’ attitudes toward legal

systems influence children’s views as to what is legally acceptable.[41] For example,

children whose parents are continually in jail are more accepting of incarceration.

Penal systems : The penal systems act as an agent of socialization upon prisoners

and the guards. Prison is a separate environment from that of normal society;

prisoners and guards form their own communities and create their own social

norms. Guards serve as "social control agents" who discipline and provide security.[42] From the view of the prisoners, the communities can be oppressive and

domineering, causing feelings of defiance and contempt towards the guards.[42] Because of the change in societies, prisoners experience loneliness, a lack of

emotional relationships, a decrease in identity and "lack of security and autonomy".[43] Both the inmates and the guards feel tense, fearful, and defensive, which creates

an uneasy atmosphere within the community.[42]

Language  People learn to socialize differently depending on the specific language

and culture in which they live. A specific example of this is code switching. This is

where immigrant children learn to behave in accordance with the languages used in

their lives: separate languages at home and in peer groups (mainly in educational

settings).[44] Depending on the language and situation at any given time, people will

socialize differently [16]

Mass media  The mass media are the means for delivering impersonal

communications directed to a vast audience. The term media comes from Latin

meaning, "middle," suggesting that the media's function is to connect people. Since

mass media has enormous effects on our attitudes and behavior, notably in regards

to aggression, it is an important contributor to the socialization process.[10]

Some sociologists and theorists of culture have recognized the power of mass

communication as a socialization device. Denis McQuail recognizes the argument:

… the media can teach norms and values by way of symbolic reward and punishment

for different kinds of behavior as represented in the media. An alternative view is that it

is a learning process whereby we all learn how to behave in certain situations and the

expectations which go with a given role or status in society.—McQuail 2005: 494)

Learning

Learning can be social or nonsocial.[45] Consider the example of a child learning about

bees. If is child is exploring and playing with no one else around, the child may see a

bee and touch it (out of curiosity). If the child is stung by the bee, the child learns that

touching bees is associated with pain. This is nonsocial learning, since no one else was

around. In contrast, a child may benefit from social learning about bees. If the child is

with mom, dad or anyone else, the child's inquisitive approach to a bee may lead to

some kind of social intervention. Maybe Aunt Emy sees the child reaching for a bee and

simply points the child in another direction, saying "Look at that pretty butterfly." Maybe

Uncle Ed would say, "Don’t touch the bee, because it can hurt you and make you cry."

Maybe Mom would have said, "Honey, stay away from bees because they sting." There

are all sorts of ways that people can interact with a child to help the child learn to avoid

ever being stung. Any and all of these social interventions allow the child to benefit from

social learning, though some of these social interventions may be more educational and

useful than others.[45]

What is the socialization process?          Socialization is the process by which children and adults learn from others. We begin learning from others during the early days of life; and most people continue their social learning all through life (unless some mental or physical disability slows or stops the learning process). Sometimes the learning is fun, as when we learn a new sport, art or musical technique from a friend we like. At other times, social learning is painful, as when we learn not to drive too fast by receiving a large fine for speeding.

        Natural socialization occurs when infants and youngsters explore, play and discover the social world around them. Planned socialization occurs when other people take actions designed to teach or train others -- from infancy on. Natural socialization is easily seen when looking at the young of almost any mammalian species (and some birds). Planned socialization is mostly a human phenomenon; and all through history, people have been making plans for teaching or training others. Both natural and planned socialization can have good and bad features: It is wise to learn the best features of both natural and planned socialization and weave them into our lives.

        Positive socialization is the type of social learning that is based on pleasurable and exciting experiences. We tend to like the people who fill our social learning processes with positive motivation, loving care, and rewarding opportunities. Negative socialization occurs when others use punishment, harsh criticisms or anger to try to "teach us a lesson;" and often we come to dislike both negative socialization and the people who impose it on us.

          There are all types of mixes of positive and negative socialization; and the more positive social learning experiences we have, the happier we tend to be -- especially if we learn useful information that helps us cope well with the challenges of life. A high ratio of negative to positive socialization can make a person unhappy, defeated or pessimistic about life. One of the goals of Soc 142 is to show people how to increase the ratio of positive to negative in the socialization they receive from others -- and that they give to others. [Some people will defend negative socialization, since painful training can prepare people to be ready to fight and die in battle, put themselves at great risk in order to save others, endure torture and hardship. This is true; but many people receive far more negative socialization than they need, and hopefully fewer and fewer people will need to be trained for battle, torture and hardship.]

          Soc 142 shows that positive socialization, coupled with valuable information about life and the skills needed to live well, can be a powerful tool for promoting human development. We all have an enormous human potential, and we all could develop a large portion of it if we had the encouragement that comes from positive socialization and the wisdom that comes from valuable information about living. Information about both natural and planned socialization can be especially useful.

          Our prior socialization helps explain a gigantic chunk of who we are at present -- what we think and feel, where we plan to go in life. But we are not limited by the things given to us by our prior social learning experiences; we can take all our remaining days and steer our future social learning in directions that we value. The more that we know about the socialization process, the more effective we can be in directing our future learning in the ways that will help us most.

          Because we were not able to select our parents, we were not able to control much of the first 10 or 20 years of our socialization. However, most people learn to influence their own socialization as they gain experience in life. It takes special skills to steer and direct our own socialization, and many of us pick up some of those skills

naturally as we go through life. Having a course on socialization can help us understand which skills are most effective in guiding our socialization toward the goals we most value.

          It is important to know that we all come into life with a variety of psychology systems that foster self-actualization and favor the development of our human potential. These are the biosocial mechanisms that underlie natural socialization. We can see and study natural socialization by examining the socialization of primates and other mammals. Once we under the natural biosocial processes, we can try to build strategies of self-actualization that are compatible with the natural biosocial mechanisms we are born with to make self-development as easy and rewarding as possible.

          Soc 142 shows how the natural self-actualization systems operate in everyday life so we can create as many good social experiences as possible. The study of behavior principles in everyday life is crucial to this, and that is why John and Janice Baldwin wrote a book with that name. If we understand the ways to create positive socialization experiences, we can take our human potential and develop the happy and creative sides of that potential. If we had too much negative socialization in the past and have learned to be too sad or inhibited, knowledge about positive socialization can help minimize some of the pain and allow us to build toward a more positive and creative future.  

          The goal of Soc 142 is to help you learn how to be most effective in directing your own socialization and self-actualization processes toward the goals that you value most. Special attention will be paid to exploration, play, creativity, wisdom, and positive reinforcement -- five centrally important aspects of positive socialization.

“Becoming a Member of Society Through Socialization”

From Caroline Hodges Persell. 1990. Chapter 5, pp. 98-107 inUnderstanding Society: An Introduction to Sociology. 3rd

ed. New York, NY: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.

Socialization

A girl named Genie was found in the United States in 1970. Genie's father had kept her locked in a room from the age of 20 months until age 13. Genie was harnessed naked to an infant's potty seat and left alone for hours and days through the years. When she was remembered at night, she was put to bed in a homemade straitjacket. There were no radios or televisions in the house, people spoke in hushed tones, and the only language Genie heard was an occasional obscenity from her father. He hated noise, and if Genie made any sound her father would growl at her like a dog or beat her with a stick. As a result of her confinement, Genie could not walk and her eyes could not focus beyond the boundaries of her room. She was malnourished, incontinent, and salivated constantly [Curtiss, 1977]. Despite all this, when the psychologist Susan Curtiss first met her, Genie was alert, curious, and intensely eager for human contact. When frightened or frustrated she would erupt into silent frenzies of rage--flailing about, scratching, spitting, throwing objects, but never uttering a sound. Aside from not speaking, her lack of socialization was apparent in her behavior: She would urinate in unacceptable places, go up to someone in a store and take whatever she liked of theirs, and peer intently into the faces of strangers at close range. Although Curtiss worked with her for several years, Genie never developed language abilities beyond those of a 4-year-old, and she ended up being placed in an institution. The story of Genie shows the importance of socialization in human society.Socialization refers to preparing newcomers to become members of an existing group and to think, feel, and act in ways the group considers appropriate. Viewed from the group's point of view, it is a process of member replacement. Such widely diverse situations as child rearing, teaching someone a new game, orienting a new member of an organization, preparing someone who has been

in sales work to become a manager, or acquainting an immigrant with the life and culture of a new society are all instances of socialization.Socialization is a central process in social life. Its importance has been noted by sociologists for a long time, but their image of it has shifted over the last hundred years.  In the early years of American sociology, socialization was equated with civilization. The issue was one of taming fierce individualists so they would willingly cooperate with others on common endeavors. An unruly human nature was assumed to exist prior to an individual's encounter with society. This nature had to be shaped to conform to socially acceptable ways of behaving.As time went on, however, socialization came to be seen more and more as the end result-- that is, as internalization. Internalization means taking social norms, roles, and values into one's own mind. Society was seen as the primary factor responsible for how individuals learned to think and behave. This view is evident in the work of functionalist Talcott Parsons, who gave no hint that the result of socialization might be uncertain or might vary from person to person. If people failed to play their expected roles or behaved strangely, functionalists explained this in terms of incomplete or inadequate socialization. Such people were said to be "unsocialized"--they had not yet learned what was expected of them. The trouble is, they might very well know what was expected but simply be rejecting it. Someone who runs a red light, for example, knows perfectly well that one is not supposed to do that but is doing it anyway. The possibility that individuals might have needs, desires, values, or behaviors different from those that society expects (or demands) of them was not seriously considered by functionalists .As Parsons used the term "internalization," it referred to the tendency for individuals to accept particular values and norms and to conform to them in their conduct. Dennis Wrong (1961) deplored this view of internalization as being an "oversocialized" conception of human beings. It left no room for the "animal" or biological side of human existence, where motivational drives might conflict with the discipline of internalized social norms. Functionalists deny the presence in humans "of motivational forces bucking against the hold that social discipline has over them" (Wrong, 1961, p. 187). Individual drives do sometimes conflict with social expectations, however. For example, a common theme in movies and TV is that of

married people becoming involved in sexual relationships with persons other than their spouses. They know they are not supposed to have an affair, but they do so anyway.Undoubtedly as a reaction to the overly determined Parsonian view of socialization, a group of interpretive sociologists has reasserted the independence of individuals . They reject Parsons's view of socialization as internalized values, norms, and habits, and they reject the notion of society as something out there (a given) that affects individuals the way Parsons suggested it did. The interpretive perspective sees socialization as an interactive process. Individuals negotiate their definitions of the situation with others. A couple, for example, may negotiate between themselves a conception of marriage that is sharply different from the view of marriage held by people in the larger society. The interpretive view offers an "undersocialized" view of human behavior, since it tends to minimize the importance of historical social structures and the deep internalization of social values and norms (Wentworth, 1980). But the innovative couple may find that their personally developed conception of marriage is challenged or undermined by friends, in-laws, legal systems, employers, or others.Both the functionalist and the interpretive views of socialization are incomplete. Each is relevant for understanding some features, but both tend to ignore other important aspects of social life. It is useful to combine the helpful points of each approach into a more complete view of socialization. Wentworth (1980) proposes exactly such a synthesis. He suggests that an adequate view of socialization must leave room for free will and human autonomy, though noting the patterned social structures and processes that influence individuals. Wentworth's combined view clarifies the socialization that occurs in families, schools, groups, sports teams, organizations, and societies. We can distinguish three major aspects of socialization:1. The context in which it occurs2. The actual content and processes people use to socialize others3. The results arising from those contexts and processesThe context is like the theater or stage in which socialization occurs. Social context includes culture, language, and social structures such as the class, ethnic, and gender hierarchies of a society. Context also includes social and historical events, power and control in social life, and the people and institutions with whom individuals come in contact in the course of their socialization.

The content and process of socialization is like the play, the lines, and the actors. It includes the structure of the socializing activity--how intense and prolonged it is, who does it, how it is done, whether it is a total experience or only a partial process, how aware the individual is of alternatives, and how attractive those alternatives are. Content refers specifically to what is passed from member to novice. Processes are those interactions that convey to new members how they are to speak, behave, think, and even feel. The view of socialization as an interactive process stands in contrast to the deterministic views of how socialization occurs. Old and new members interact, and in the process exercise mutual influence on each other.Outcomes may properly be defined as what happens later, after someone has been exposed to particular content and processes. New members may learn the behaviors, attitudes, and values that old members hoped they would learn. What do these include? First and foremost among humans is learning how to speak and to apply the rules of language to creating new sentences. Like learning to play chess, learning a language involves being shown some of the ways vocabulary and grammar can be combined (like learning how the various pieces can be moved in a chess game), and then creating one's own combinations from those possibilities. Closely related to learning to use a language is gaining a sense of the rules underlying a society's culture. Even learning to walk in an upright position appears to be the result of socialization.THE CONTEXT OF SOCIALIZATIONSocialization occurs within biological, psychological, and social contexts. Each of these offers possibilities and limitations that may influence socialization.The Biological Context Biological features are regularly suggested as sources of human behavior. Sociobiologists (see Chapter 3) suggest that some human capacities may be "wired into" our biological makeup. For example, even newborn babies seem to strive for maximum social interaction. They move their heads back and forth in burrowing or "rooting" motions looking for milk; they have powerful, grasping fingers that cling tightly to other human fingers or bodies; and they move so as to maximize body contact with their caregivers. These facts suggest that infants are born wanting human contact.Sociobiologists argue that traits which aid survival and reproduction (like learning not to eat things that induce vomiting) will survive,

whereas others (like unusual whiteness in certain animals, which makes them easier prey) will tend to die out. Although this evidence suggests that biological factors clearly play a role in development, it does not show that all human behavior is biologically determined. Biology sets the stage, on which a very broad range of human behavior occurs. Most or all of the important differences between societies are due to social rather than biological factors.As educators have become more aware of children with "learning disabilities," they have begun to wonder if some conditions, such as those labeled "dyslexia" (that is, the inability to grasp the meaning of something one reads) are due to the incomplete development of certain nerve pathways in the brain that may scramble signals on the way to the brain, making it likely that children will "see" bs instead of ds, qs rather than ps, and so forth. Such problems may be part of the biological context of socialization. They may interact in significant ways with psychological and social factors during socialization and have important effects on the outcomes-- for example, if children are labeled retarded or develop a sense of worthlessness, they may be less likely to learn.In short, biology provides rich potential for becoming human and may present general tendencies, such as the tendency to seek out social interaction or to use language, but it does not determine the particular form such social development takes.The Psychological Context Emotional States and the Unconscious The primary factor in the psychological context of socialization is the psychological state of the person being socialized. Psychological states include feelings such as fear, anger, grief, love, and happiness or a sense of emotional deprivation. Strongly feeling one or more of these emotions might very well inhibit or promote socialization of a particular kind. Fear may make it difficult for young children to be socialized in school, whereas people in love may leant very quickly what makes their loved ones happy. Emotions can also influence how individuals perceive the content of socialization, whether in becoming a member of a family group or a religious sect. Knowing something about the feelings of the people involved (the psychological context) helps explain the results of the socialization process.Cognitive Development Theories A number of psychologists emphasize the series of stages through which humans progress. Although emotional concerns can be

involved, these theorists focus oncognitive (intellectual) development, which occurs in a systematic, universal sequence through a series of stages. The most influential theorist of intellectual development was the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget. A sharp observer of children's development, Piaget stressed that children need to master the skills and operations of one stage of intellectual development before they are able to learn something at the next stage.Whether or not they all agree on the unfolding of specific stages, cognitive development theorists see children as increasingly trying to make sense of their social worlds as they grow up. Children try to see patterns in the way things happen.Social contexts influence individual development. Culture exists before the socialization of new members begins. Parents, for example, do not need to decide alone what they arc going to teach their children, since much of what they will pass along they have themselves learned through socialization. Besides culture, individuals are affected by social and historical events and by a number of individuals who actively try to socialize them.Social and Historical Events Major social and historical events can be a force in socializing an entire generation. Such major events as the Great Depression of the 1930s, the Holocaust in Europe during World War II, or the civil rights movement that took shape in the United States in the 1960s have profound implications for individual socialization. Elder (1974) compared children whose families were very poor during the 1930s with others whose families were more comfortable. Those suffering greater deprivation depended less on formal education for their life achievements and more on effort and accomplishment outside of education. Their health as adults tended to be affected negatively by their economic hardships. Finally, they tended to value marriage and family more highly as a result of their economic deprivation (Elder, 1974). Thus individuals who live in extraordinary times appear to be influenced by the historical events around them.Participants in Socialization Obviously, parents and the immediate family of infants are important to their early care and development. Major changes in the family are increasing the importance of other caregivers as well. Teachers and schools transmit formal skills, knowledge, and social values. As infants mature, they have more and more contact with other children their age, called peers. Inevitably, children are

affected by the community and nation in which they are reared. Children in the United States today spend a great deal of time with the mass media. Radio, movies, and-- most significantly--television have transformed the way we experience the world and what we know about it.THE FAMILY. In rural societies, children have most of their early social contact with the family. Today, however, the family's importance in the child's life is changing. The American family no longer necessarily conforms to the stereotypical nuclear family with two parents and two or more dependent children. Fewer than one family in five consists of a working father, full-time homemaker mother, and at least one child. There are more and more single-parent families, and 56 percent of all mothers with children under 6 years old are working (U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1985a, p. 399). More and more children are receiving their early and primary care from others in addition to their parents. What are the effects on young children of having only one parent in the home? Of having a mother who works outside the home? One study suggests that single parents with adequate financial and emotional support are able to raise their children quite effectively (Monaghan-Leckband, 1978).Although most children growing up in America today will spend a great deal of time with people other than members of their families, this does not mean that the participation of families in socialization has ended.On the contrary, the family continues to be a major means of passing on values, attitudes, and behaviors. As we saw in Chapter 1, in the case of Alex and Alice as compared to Albert and his wife, family origin does a great deal to shape a child's social opportunities, resources, and experience. Different social positions may be related to different socialization for children even when they live in the same society.DAY CARE. Nearly 10 million children 5 years old or younger have mothers who work away from home. This includes 48 percent of the mothers of children 3 years old or younger. For these children, day care is an important agent of socialization. In 1982 there were more than 30,000 day-care centers, ranging from informal arrangements at the home of a neighbor to large nurseries run by schools, churches, charities, corporations, and occasionally employers (Lindsey, 1984). Figure 5.1 shows the primary childcare arrangements for children under age 5 whose mothers work outside

the home.When the ratio of staff to children is at least one to ten or lower, when the groups of children are not larger than 20, and when caregivers are trained in early childhood development and are attentive to the children, the children who attend day care do very well (Collins, 1984; Lindsey, 1984). Children from very low income families have benefited considerably over the long term as a result of federally financed Head Start and other early day-care programs (Deutsch et al., 1985; Schweinhart and Weikart, 1987).SCHOOLS. As societies become more complex and there is a greater division of labor, family members cannot spend all day every day teaching children what they need to know to function effectively as adults in society. Therefore, most societies have established schools to teach youngsters certain skills. Schools teach values and attitudes as well. These values and attitudes include, for example, competitiveness or cooperation, conformity or innovation.Schools try to impress upon children the importance of working for rewards, and they try to teach neatness, punctuality, orderliness, and respect for authority. Teachers are called upon to evaluate how well children perform a particular task or how much skill they have. Thus, in school, children's relationships with adults move from nurture and behavioral concerns to performance of tasks and skills determined by others.PEERS. A peer group consists of friends and associates who are about the same age and social status. As children get older, going to school brings them into regular contact with other children of their age. As early as first or second grade, children form social groups. In these early peer groups, children learn to share toys and other scarce resources (such as the teacher's attention). Peers may reinforce behaviors that are stressed by parents and schools--for example, whether it is all right to hit someone else and what arc acceptable behaviors for boys and girls. As children move through school, the interests of peer groups may diverge more and more from those of adults. This is particularly true of the United States but seems also to be the case in certain socialist societies today. Youthful concerns may center on popular music and movies, sports, sex, or illegal activities. Parents and teachers, on the other hand, want children to do schoolwork, help at home, and "stay out of trouble." Peer groups may provide social rewards--praise, prestige, and attention--to individuals for doing things adults disapprove of.In the former Soviet Union, the peer group was used by authorities

to reinforce the behaviors and attitudes they desire. For example, if a child camesto school late, it was not only the teacher who noted this (perhaps by praising children who are on time) but also those in the child's row in the classroom, who might be enlisted to urge the child to come to school on time (Bronfenbrenner, 1970). Peer sanctions (punishments) are particularly effective. In Israel, for instance, in a collective farm group, a child who breaks a rule such as using a tractor when it is not allowed and damaging the machine in the process may be formally ostracized for some time. During this period the other children will not speak to or play with the child. Although effective in achieving social goals, the united effect of peer and official authority is more powerful and painful than official authority alone for the individual who does not conform. In our society, adolescents are heavily influenced by their peers when it comes to dress, musical fads, cheating, and drug use. In making their future life plans, however, they are influenced more by their parents than by their peers (Davies and Kandel, 1981; Kandel and Lesser, 1972; Krosnick and Judd, 1982; Williams, 1972). Girls seem to be somewhat more influenced in their future life plans by peers than are boys (Bush, 1985; Davies and Kandel, 1981; Simmons et al., 1979).COMMUNITY AND COUNTRY. Every society tries to influence how young people grow up. Much of this influence is expressed through parents, schools, and peers, but it is worth considering for a moment how children become exposed to the political and economic ideas that are considered important for citizens of a particular country.Children learn political information and attitudes rapidly during the elementary school years, particularly between fourth and fifth grades (Hess and Torney, 1967). One of the first things they learn is that they belong to some kind of a political unit. Even very young children develop a sense of "we" in relation to their own country and learn to see other countries in terms of"they." Children also tend to believe that their own country and language are superior to others. This bond may be the most critical socialization feature relating to the political life of the nation (Hess and Torney, 1967). The family helps provide this basic loyalty to country, but the school also shapes the political concepts that expand and develop children's early feelings of attachment. Political orientations develop early and reach nearly adult levels by the end of elementary school, but there are still some critical changes that occur at other points during the life cycle. High school students become more aware of differences

between political parties and tend to become more active politically. In the first decade of adult life people modify their political orientations as they take on new occupational and family roles (Jennings and Niemi, 1968).Children form economic ideas fairly early in life. One study examined how youngsters are socialized into capitalism. When third-graders were compared with twelfth-graders, the older students were found to hold more negative attitudes toward labor unions and more favorable attitudes toward business than did the younger children (Cummings and Taebel, 1978), suggesting that, over time, they developed attitudes that were more favorable toward capitalism, perhaps because of what they learned at school, from the media, or at home.MASS MEDIA. The mass media include many forms of communication--such as books, magazines, radio, television, and movies--that reach large numbers of people without personal contact between senders and receivers. In the last few decades, children have been dramatically socialized by one source in particular: television. Studies have found that children spend more time watching TV than they spend in school.It seems unbelievable that in 1945 the pollster George Gallup asked Americans, "Do you know what television is?" Now virtually every American home has at least one television set, and the average set is on almost 7 hours a day (Comstock et al., 1978). How has this transformation affected children? Reports vary, but children in the fifth to eighth grades view an average of 4 to 6 hours daily (B. S. Greenberg and Dervin, 1970; Lyle and Hoffman, 1972). Most of the research on the effects of television has been on the cognitive and behavioral results of TV watching. The topic most often studied has been the influence of television on antisocial behavior, especially violence. Current research supports the view that seeing violence on television increases the chance that a child will be aggressive (Comstock et al., 1978). No publicly available studies unambiguously relate changes in behavior (such as food habits or drug use) to exposure to television advertising (Comstock et al., 1978) .Research also suggests that young people obtain considerable political and social information from television, but that how they perceive the information depends largely on parental influence (Comstock et al., 1978). For example, during the Vietnam War, television was the most important source of public information

about the war. Yet how young people felt about it-- whether they favored or opposed it--seemed to be influenced more by their parents than by the opinions presented on television. Those who opposed the war interpreted the news on TV as opposing the war, whereas those favoring it saw the news as favoring it (Comstock et al., 1978).Most researchers studying the effects of television on children have focused on the content of the programs and not on the total experience of television watching. They argue that there is too much violence and sex on children's programs and that more good educational programs for children are needed.Winn (1977) suggests that the experience of watching television itself is limiting. When people watch television, no matter what the program, they are simply watchers and are not having any other experience. According to Winn, and many agree, children need to develop family relationships, the capacity for self direction, and the basic skills of communication (reading, writing, and speaking); to discover their own strengths and limitations, and to learn the rules that keep social interaction alive. Television works against all these goals by putting children in a passive situation where they do not speak, interact, experiment, explore, or do anything else active because they are watching a small moving picture on a machine. This research shows the growing importance of television as a medium of socialization, although clearly it is only one among a number of important influences.Social Position as Part of the Context Your family's social class, economic position, and ethnic background--as well as your gender--can affect the ways in which you will be socialized. People in more advantageous positions, like Alice and Alex in Chapter 1, tend to develop higher self-evaluations. As a result, they feel justified in having more resources. Similarly, those in less desired positions tend to have lower self-evaluations and may feel that their lower status is deserved (Della Fave, 1980).Sociologists ask if children in different social classes are socialized differently. For instance are middle-class children socialized differently from lower-class children? If so, why and how? Middle-class parents are slightly less likely to use physical punishment than are lower-class parents (Gecas, 1979). Middle-class parents appear to be more concerned about their children's intentions than with the negative consequences of their actions. Thus, if a child breaks a dish a middle-class parent will be concerned with whether he or she did it

"on purpose" or whether it was an accident, and the reaction will vary accordingly. Lower-class parents tend to react in about the same way whatever the intention of the child (Kohn, 1969).These differences in parental response may stem from the life situations of people in different classes. Different parental experiences in the occupational world color the view of what children need to learn (Kohn, 1969, 1976; Kohn and Schooler, 1983; Pearlin, 1971).Parents who are closely supervised on the job (more often blue-collar workers) value conformity more than do less supervised parents (usually white-collar workers). Both blue- and white-collar parents increasingly prefer more autonomy in their children, at least in the Detroit area (Alwin, 1984).Cross-cultural studies show that members of agrarian and herding societies (where food can be accumulated and stored) tend to emphasize compliance in their socialization practices. In societies where food cannot be stored (as in hunting, gathering, or fishing economies), members more often stress individual achievement and self-reliance (Barry, Child, and Bacon, 1959).Political structure may also be related to socialization practices. Autocratic states tend to have more "severe" socialization, show clear power and deference relationships, and stress obedience (Stephens, 1963). The Soviet Union, for example, works harder to socialize children to conformity than does the United States (Bronfenbrenner, 1970) . By way of contrast, tribal societies that lack a centralized or autocratic political system allow children to be less obedient and less conforming (Stephens, 1963).All these studies suggest that parents value different traits for their children, depending on the economic, political, and social situations they face. In general, when adults have more opportunities for self-determination, they value and try to develop greater self-reliance in their children (Ellis, Lee, and Petersen, 1978). All groups try to socialize their children as well as they can, but they stress different behaviors, depending on what they see as needed in their own situation. Just as different societies may see the need for different behaviors and skills in their children, subgroups within society may do the same thing. They try to prepare their children as well as possible for the positions they are likely to hold.References

Alwin, Duane F. 1984. “Trends in Parental Socializaiton Values: Detroit, 1958-1983.”American Journal of Sociology 90: 359-82.Barry, Herbert III. Irvin Child, and Maragaret Bacon. 1959. “Relationship of Child Training to Subsistence Economy.” American Anthropologist 61:51-63.Bronfenbrenner, Urie. 1970. Two Worlds of Childhood: U.S. and U.S.S.R. New York: Basic Books-Russell Sage Foundation.Bush, Diane Mitsch. 1985. “The Impact of Changing Gender Role Expectations upon Socialization in Adolescence: Understanding the interaction of Gender, Age, and Cohort Effects.” Pp. 269-97 in Research in the Sociology of Education and Socialization. Vol. 5, eduted by Alan C. Kerchhoff. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Collins, Glenn. 1984. “Experts Debate Impact of Day Care on Children and on Society.”New York Times (September 4): B11.Comstock, George, Steven Chafee, Natan Katzman, Maxwell McCombs, and Donald Roberts. 1978. Television and Human Behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.Cummings, Scott and Del Taebel. 1978. “The Economic Socialization of Children: A Neo-Marxist Analysis.” Social Problems 26:198-210Curtiss, Susan. 1977. Genie. New York: American Press.Davies, Mark and Denise B. Kandel. 1981. “Parental and Peer Influences on Adolescents’ Educational Plans: Some Further Evidence.” American Journal of Sociology 87:363-87.Della Fave, L. Richard. 1980. “The Meek Shall Not Inherit the Earth: Self-evaluation and the Legitimacy of Stratification.” American Sociological Review 45:955-71.Deutsch, Martine, Theresa J. Jordan, and Cynthia P. Deutsch. 1985. “Long-Term Effects of Early Intervention: Summary of Selected Findings.” Xeroxed report, New York University, Institute for Developmental Studies.Ellis, Godfrey J., Gary R. Lee, and Larry R. Peterson. 1978. “Supervision and Conformity: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Parental Socialization Values.” American Journal of Sociology 84: 386-403.Gecas, Viktor. 1979. “The Influence of Social Class on Socialization.” Pp. 365-404 inContemporary Theories about the Family, edited by Wesley R. Burr, Reuben Hill. F. Ivan Nye, and Ira L. Reiss. New York: Free Press. Greengberg, B.S. and B. Dervin. 1970. Use of the Mass Media by the Urban Poor. New York: Praeger.Hess, Robert D. and Judith V. Torney. 1967. The Development of Political Attitudes in 

Children. Chicago: Aldine.Jennings, M. Kent and Richard G. Niemi. 1968. “Patterns of Political Learning.”Harvard Educational Review 39: 1-123. Kandel, Denise B. and Gerald S. Lesser. 1972. Youth in Two Worlds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Kohn, Melvin L. and Carmi Schooler. 1983. Work and Personality. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Kohn, Melvin L. 1969. Class and Conformity. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.Kohn, Melvin L. 1976. “Social Class and Parental Values: Another Confirmation of the Relationship.” American Sociological Review 41: 538-45.Krosnick, Jon A. and Charles M. Judd. 1982.”Transitions in Social Influence at Adolescence: Who Induces Cigarette Smoking?” Developmental Psychology 18:359-68.Lindsey, Robert. 1984. “Increased Demand for Day Care Prompts a Debate on Regulation.” New York Times (September 2): 1, 52.Lyle, J. and H.R. Hoffman. 1972. “Children’s Use of Television and Other Media.” Pp. 129-256 in Television and Social Behavior. Vol. 4: Television in Day-to-Day Life: Patterns of Use, edited by E. A. Rubinstein, G. A. Comstock, and J. P. Murray. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Monaghan-Leckband, Kathleen. 1978. “Role Adaptations of Single Parents: A Challenge to the Pathological View of Male and Female Single Parents.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University.Pearlin, Leonard I. 1971. Class Context and Family Relations: A Cross-National Study. Boston: Little, Brown.Schweinhart, Lawrence J. and David P. Weikart. 1987. “Evidence of Problem Prevention by Early Childhood Education.” Pp. 87-101 in Social Intervention: Potential and Constraints, edited by Klaus Hurrelmann, Franz-Xaver Kaufmann, and Friedrich Losel. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Simmons, Roberta G., Dale A. Blyth, Edward Van Cleave, and Diane Mitsch Bush. 1979. “Entry into Early Adolescence: The Impact of Puberty, School Structure, and Early Dating on Self-esteem.” American Sociological Review 44: 948-67.Stephens, William N. 1963. The Family in Cross-Cultural Perspective. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1985a. Statistical Abstract of the United

States 1986. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Wentworth, William M. 1980. Context and Understanding: An Inquiry into Socialization Theory. New York: Elsevier.Williams, T.H. 1972. “Educational Aspirations: Longitudinal Evidence on Their Development in Canadian Youth. Sociology of Education 45: 107-33.Winn, Marie. 1997. The Plug-in Drug: Television, Children and the Family. New York: Viking.Wrong, Dennis. 1961. “The Over-socialized Conception of Man in Modern Sociology.”American Sociological Review 26:183-93.