____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Subject PSYCHOLOGY

Paper No and Title Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module No and Title Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION

Module Tag PSY_P7_M2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Learning Outcomes
2. Introduction
3. Origin of social constructionism
4. Postmodernism
5. The realism-relativism debate

6. Nature and construction of knowledge

7. Symbolization

8. Issues in social constructionism

9. Criticisms of social constructionism

10. Summary

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Learning Outcomes
After studying this module, you shall be able to

 Know about social constructionism and its origin

 Learn about the realism-relativism debate and
 Evaluate the issues in and criticisms of social constructionism

2. Introduction
Social constructionism developed around thirty years ago as an attempt to understand the nature of reality.
It is linked with the post-modern era in qualitative research. It is linked to the doubt raised by Bacon as to
how observations accurately reflect the world. Social constructionism adopts an anti-realist, relativist
position. The terms constructivism and social constructionism are generally used interchangeably.
Constructivism focuses more on cognitive processes while social constructionism focuses more on the
social rather than an individual. It does not focus much on the cognitive processes.

3. Origin of social constructionism

In the development of social constructionism, there is a major influence of Berger and Luckmann who in
turn are influenced by Mead, Marx, Schutz and Durkheim. The roots of social constructionism can be
traced to an interpretivist approach in a way. Mead who contributed to the growth of symbolic
interactionism, is a crucial link. Though they have common philosophical roots, social constructionism is
different from interpretivism.

Mead

Both constructionists and interpretivists study the process by which meanings are created and modified.
They have the same goal of understanding the world from the perspective of those living in it. Both
emerged as a challenge to the overemphasis on science and both have been influenced by the post-
modernist movement. The goal of interpretivism is to understand the meaning of social phenomena.
Interpretivists want to develop an objective science to study human subjective experience. They apply a
logical empiricist methodology to human inquiry. According to Schwandt (2003) symbolic interactionism
is an interpretative science.

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Social constructionists argue that the world and the people are
the product of social processes. The society itself is the root of
experience. Language is the main carrier of meanings and its role as a medium is central.

Constructionism holds that knowledge is relative and this places it in opposition to the positivist,
empiricist tradition of science. Due to this two distinct strands of social constructionist critique have
developed. One is a relativist position that does not lead to any political activity but is opposed to the
positivist tradition. The other states that while social constructions emerge through social processes and
are relative, they are not arbitrary.

4. Postmodernism

Social constructionism is also viewed as a source of the postmodern movement. Some writers attribute
the rise of cultural studies to social constructionism. Socially constructed reality stresses the
worldviews by individuals in dialectical interaction with society. The various realities formed comprise
the imagined worlds of human social existence are incorporated into institutions by habit, legitimized by
religion and philosophy, and internalized by socialization and education. In his book “The Reality of
Social Construction”, Dave Elder-Vass understands the development of social constructionism as an
outcome of postmodernism.

Social constructionism focuses on uncovering the ways in which individuals and groups construct their
perceived social reality. It looks at how social phenomena are created and institutionalized by humans.
The social construction of reality is a dynamic process. It is reproduced by people who act on their
interpretations.

5. The realism–relativism debate

Social constructionists opine that social processes play a central role in everyday life. They accept that the
close relationship between knowledge and activity. They criticize the beliefs and methods of mainstream
psychology, and propose alternative models. There are also many disagreements about the limits of social
constructionism. These questions have been put together as ‘the realism–relativism debate’.

According to Searle (1995) realism is the doctrine that an external world exists independently of our
representations of it. The ways in which we experience the world and ourselves like perceptions,
thoughts, language, beliefs and artifacts are called representations. Relativism proposes that since the
external world is inaccessible to us, it may not be postulated. In this way, social constructionism appears
to be relativist. Gergen (1985) mentions that dependence of observation on theory, ‘proving’ the theory of
logical induction only by induction itself and paradigm shifts in the sciences, pose the demand for a
relativist stance. According to Harré (1992) due to extra-discursive influences and the need to understand
continuity as well as variability some have proposed realist ontology for social constructionism. The most
straightforward pioneering of relativism in social constructionist thought is provided by Edwards et al.
(1995). They call relativism the ‘quintessential academic position’. The value of relativism can be
understood by two arguments commonly used against it.

1. Occurs when realists try to demonstrate the physical existence of things to relativists.
2. Relativist’s dilemma which occurs since relativism must consider everyone’s views as equally
valid.

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Based on this analysis relativism does appear to win over

realism. Edwards et al. use many strategies to blur the
distinction between ‘things’ and ‘words.’ They place the burden of proof in the realist camp.

According to Searle (1995) the demand for a proof of realism presupposes what is challenged. Edwards et
al. state that the strength of relativism is that it insists that all apparent truths can be challenged.

This universal utility being one of relativism’s strengths is also its greatest weakness. The choice of
whether to apply realism or relativism is determined by moral, political or pragmatic aspects.

Discourse is situated in a material world; it is the product of embodied beings. Realizing that the world is
socially constructed need not imply adopting relativism. Social constructions include all things around us
like racism, marriage, government, crime, disease, psychology, people etc. However, the dominance of
the processes of construction may vary from one to another.

The arguments made by Edwards are influenced by and benefited by the postmodern Zeitgeist, in which
relativism is placed. Relativism also has a great influence on postmodern art and literature. Thus, in the
postmodern culture there is largely an uncritical acceptance of relativism.

According to Kant, there is a world that exists independently of human minds hence we can’t say that we
created the world. But this world does not have structure. We impose structure on the world by thinking
of it in a certain way. The main criticisms leveled against social constructionism are that it is anti-realist
since it denies that knowledge is a direct perception of reality. Many critics state that social
constructionism poses a challenge to biomedical reality and questions obvious realities.

The source of tension between realism and relativism is that researchers themselves construct a social
world and not just represent some independent reality. Qualitative researchers are increasingly adopting
the relativist position.

Realism and relativism are two poles on a continuum. One depicts objective reality and the other
postulates multiple realities. Both these positions create problems for qualitative research. When a realist
position is adopted, it ignores how the researcher constructs their interpretations of the findings. Rather it
assumes that what is reported is true. Relativism leads to the conclusion that there are multiple realities.
Social constructionism makes epistemological claims only.

For Hammersley (1992) the solution is to adopt a midway between the two: subtle realism. Subtle realism
acknowledges the existence of an independent reality. However, it denies that one can access that reality.
Qualitative research does not fix meanings but draw inferences about meaning. However, now a sharp
distinction between realism and relativism is not drawn.

Sismondo (1993) makes a distinction between strict constructionism and mild constructionism. strict
constructionism is criticized as it denies physical reality. Majority of the studies adopt the mild form of
analysis.

Relativism argues for multiple realities and proposes that there are multiple interpretations of those
realities. However, there is no way of judging one account of reality as better than another. Craib (1997)
criticizes social constructionism for its position on the realist-relativist argument by stating that since
social constructionism is itself a social construct, it is no better than a theory.

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Therefore, research using social constructionist framework is

criticized since there is no standard against which to judge the
findings. In this sense it becomes a methodological issue. This occurs because social constructionists do
not present their findings in objectivist terms.

If one adopts the position of social constructionism on human activity, understanding of change is
difficult. Change occurs by human activity. Even though reality is socially defined, it is defined by
individuals and groups. However, in reality those who are more powerful are most successful in pushing
their own version.

6. Nature and Construction of Knowledge

Constructionists state that knowledge and truth are created. Some state that concepts are constructed and
that they correspond to something real in the world. This corresponds with the ideas of Berger and
Luckmann and Hammersley. They believe that reality is socially defined and hence implies the subjective
experience of life. Individuals or groups of individuals define this reality. This perspective of
constructionism is does not look into ontological questions.

Berger and Luckmann (1991) are concerned with how is knowledge constructed, how is it significant for
the society. Knowledge is created by the interactions of individuals within society and this is at the centre
of constructionism.

According to Berger and Luckmann (1991) society exists both as objective and subjective reality.
Objective reality occurs through the interaction of people with the social world which in turn influences
people resulting in creation of routines and habits. This is institutionalized by the society. Future
generations consider this type of knowledge as objective.

The experience of society as subjective reality takes place through primary and secondary socialization.
Our identity originates from the social group. Socialization is done by significant others and this is
internalized by individuals. This is done through the medium of language which makes thoughts and
concepts possible and not the other way around.

Subjective reality is maintained and reconstructed through conversation. It consists of concepts that can
be shared with others. Hence, there is shared meaning and understanding. Thus concepts are not required
to be redefined in conversation every time.

Schwandt (2003) differentiates between radical and social constructionism. Radical constructionism
concerns the idea that knowledge cannot represent the world. The world can only be known with
reference to how people experience it. Burningham and Cooper (1999) discuss constructionism as being
either contextual or strict. Contextual constructionism recognizes objective reality, while the latter
maintains a relativist position.

7. Symbolization
Symbolic interactionism emphasizes the importance of interaction in the creation of norms during
uncertainty. Through symbolization events, conditions, artifacts, and people acquire a certain meaning.

Emotion

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Early scholars used affective dimensions to explain expression

and not rational action. Affective dimensions are a crucial part
of social networks and personal relationships. Commitment which binds people in various relationships
also has an affective underpinning.

Identity
Collective identity is the feeling of we-ness that provides a sense of shared identity. It is an individual’s
cognitive, moral, and emotional relationship with a larger community. Personal identities are the
attributes and meanings which an individual assigns to him/ herself. Social identities are attributed to
others. They derive from category based membership like class, caste etc.

8. Issues in social constructionism

A fully relativist social constructionism is unable to address certain issues adequately:

Embodiment

The human body is a biological organism that provides the material requirements for thought, emotion
and language. Whereas social constructionism dismisses the body it simultaneously addresses it by
analyzing the discourses of bodily matters. It ignores the importance of physiological, hormonal, and
anatomical aspects.

Another aspect of embodiment is that subjectivity itself is embodied. This fact is also ignored.

Materiality

Materiality refers to the physical nature of the world in which we lead our lives. It includes human body,
and the various objects and entities around. All these things are not reducible to discourse and discourse
cannot be separated from materiality. The dominant trend in social constructionism is to ignore the
contributions of the ecosystem. Social constructionism becomes a little unconvincing by over
emphasizing the social and ignoring the material.

Power

Some strands of social constructionism have failed to theorize power adequately and take account of its
influence.

Embodiment and power are intimately related as Foucault said. Power is a material involves interpersonal
violence, access to resources, weapons etc. Power is essential to understand subjectivity since the power
dynamics are important part of relationships.

There are two strands of social constructionism based on this issue. The relationship of power and
discourse is central to the work of Foucault, and constructionists influenced by him. Power is also
acknowledged in Gergen’s notion of ‘warranting voice’. Power appears in and operates through
discourse. But since constructionists deny both materiality and embodiment, they easily ignore power
relationships.

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Gender roles are the product of social forces. Infact there is

nothing biological corresponding to the racial categories many
authors believe that the understanding of certain mental disorders is socially constructed.

9. Criticisms of social constructionism

Social constructionism has been criticized on many grounds:
 It generally ignores the influence of biological factors on behavior.
 It fails to take into account the evolved properties of the brain.
 Internal contradictions: its incapacity to assert anything at all given its claims on the nature of
language, objects, reality, and the like.
 Its failure to distinguish content from process.

10. Summary

 Social constructionism originated as an attempt to understand the nature of reality.

 In the development of social constructionism, there is a major influence of Berger and Luckmann
who in turn are influenced by Mead, Marx, Schutz and Durkheim. The origins of social
constructionism can be traced to interpretivism.
 Social constructionism is also viewed as a source of the postmodern movement.
 Realism is the doctrine that an external world exists independently of our representations of it
(Searle 1995). Relativism proposes that since the external world is inaccessible to us, it may not
be postulated. In this way, social constructionism appears to be relativist. Sismondo (1993)
differentiates between strict and mild constructionism.
 Through symbolization events, conditions, artifacts, and people take on a particular meaning.
 Social constructionism has been criticized on many grounds.

PSYCHOLOGY Paper no.7: SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Module no.2: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION