Introduction
I started the paper with description of Social Cognition and Dialogical Self paradigms as the issue is to explore the chances of integration of above two. In the above context, I used Forgas writings that quoted Plato about primitive, animalistic mode of responding and ended up with universally beneficial cultural developments as well as psychology and psychotherapy. Regarding dialogical Self I considered multi voiced self that uses the dialogue in a social context. In the next step while exploring the integration of both the paradigms my perspective regarding it is in the background of culture and globalisation, which make a different society in each community and put forth new contexts for social as well as dialogical self. Moreover, I expressed my opinion that the integration of both the paradigms is based on the fact that the dialogical self expresses itself whenever an individual uses his/her social cognitive self in social contexts.
Social Cognition and Dialogical Self
While discussing Social Cognition as well as Dialogical Self, the affect is important to understand influences on a person that prompt him/her to behave in social contexts. According to Forgas (2001, pp 2), the feelings of a person have profound influence on his/her thoughts, judgments as well as interpersonal behaviours. In the above context, the delicate relationship between affect, cognition, behaviour comes to the fore and play the role of affect in social cognition. In the above context Forgas (2002) quotes Plato who believed that affect constitutes a more primitive, animalistic mode of responding that is incompatible with reason. In the above context, Forgas (2001) quotes Elster, 1985, pp. 379) about the majority of cases, the affective reactions may tend to overwhelm or subvert rational mental processes. However, Forgas (2001) quotes advances in social cognition, neuro-anatomy and psychophysiology that recognize that it is not necessary for affect to show a disruptive on social behaviour. Hence, the affect may result in rational as well as irrational behaviour in a person. In this context, Forgas (2001, pp. 3) quotes Damasio (1994) about ability to experience the role of affect on social decisions that is considered as part of adaptive functioning. In this context the aspect of self comes to the fore and consideration of dialogical self is necessary as it deals with developments in cultural, cognitive and social psychology as well as psychotherapy (Forgas, 2001).
Now coming to dialogical self, it is closely related to narrative psychology. Constructivism as well as cultural psychology also concentrate on multi-voiced self and that needs a dialogue. The above aspect finds base in the point that the individual self is social in origin and it functions through dialogue. So, while self is functioning one can find the voices of society and its significances in dialogue (ISDS, 2008, 1st Paragraph). Hence investigating the dialogical self has a great range that extends from literature to brain. In that course of consideration, it is important to consider social cognitive self paradigm as it deals with social aspect of a person and hence is capable to affect his/her dialogue (ISDS, 2008, 2nd paragraph).
As the concept of this paper is to examine the integration of social cognitive self and dialogical self, it is important to include self and identity, culture and self, globalization, music and dialogue as well as political psychology and reconstruction of self narratives. Hence, psychotherapy including dialogue and development also finds place in the discussion (ISDS, 2008, paragraph 3).
Dialogical Self and Culture
While contemplating about the integration of dialogical self concepts and social cognitive self, it is important to mention culture as dialogical self becomes global nowadays. In this context, Valsiner & Han (2008, page 2) mention about the personality psychology that grew in cultural psychology as well as psychotherapy. While understanding the above aspect in different cultural conditions all over the world the social cognition aspects of a person are necessary to understand realities that undergo historical changes. Valsiner & Han opine that the modern world is liquid thus emphasising the change in solidity of human bonds and brings out the difference between solid stage of modernity and liquid stage of modernity thus again giving importance to social cognitive self of the individuals in the society. Hence, it is important to locate culture within the dialogical self, before exploring the integration of social cognitive self and dialogical self (Valsiner, Han, 2008).
Hence, the self structures as well as processes are well accepted but divergent across the cultures. In the above context, Chaudhary (2008, page 1) quotes the ideologies of personhood that are prevalent within a culture predisposition. As it approaches the relationships in a social context, the critical domains of activity are part of the study and consider the social cognitive self of individuals. At this juncture dialogical self theory talks about inter objectivity and the individual who is part of the society and is responsible for social relationships. Hence, self structures enable us to understand the creation of self through dialogue between persons of different positions and in different contexts. However, Chaudhary (2008, page 2) mentions the fixed player in self dynamics as well as the thoughts and thinkers and the creation of nucleus of self. In this context experience with reality, which is social context will be choice of the researchers. With the consideration of reality the quasi openness between different contexts between different individuals and groups that exist within the self may come to the fore and that brings about aspects of social cognition and self to understand them. Hence, the term ‘self’ can be considered as first person’s understanding and the belief as third person understanding hereafter in this paper. Hence, self and beliefs constitute social setup that needs cognitive abilities as dynamics between voices and positions in dialogical paradigms constitute a heterogeneous society. Hence, the notion of socialisation indicates that the self cannot be completed when it is enclosed with singular outlook or consciousness. Moreover, the dialogical nature and standards depend on the awareness and sublingual monological constraints (Nandita, Chaudary. 2008, pp 1-2).
In addition to the above aspect, the self may be a newly sanctified case of rugged individualism as part of dialogical paradigm. Roxanne J. Fand (1999, page 15) quotes about the freedom of opportunity that enables to go ahead economically results in a double game by consolidating their interests. Hence, in this context, Roxanne J. Fand (1999, page 26) quotes about superego, which represents the interests of individual as well as society. As a result, one can keep desires emanating from self from disturbing interpersonal relationships. In the above context, the self opposes the subjectivities and thus remains undivided with other individuals and itself, which is again a social cognitive aspect of self. In addition to that the conflict between identification through dialogue and superego moulds the self narrative of an individual in such a manner that can suppress the demonised id in the unconscious in favour of socially acceptable unified self. However, there is a chance of polarisation of ego’s self concept due to rationalisation of self defence mechanisms thus resulting in morally good or perversion concepts. However, the morals may change between different societies and social cognitive aspects thus differ in various social contexts thus establishing a relationship between dialogical self and social cognitive self (Roxanne, J. Fand, 1999).
Social Cognitive Self
The important aspect of social cognitive self is perception. The perception depends of listening as well as understanding. Takashi Otake and Anne Cutler (2006, page 79) quote about the individuals who understand speech or dialogue as a sequence of words as well as speech signal itself. In the above context, Takashi Otake and Anne Cutler (2006, page 80) mention the access to mental lexicon and stored stock of words in memory and thus the perceptions, which make the self of the individual that interacts with the society with dialogical conversation. Hence, the social cognitive self and activities of a society’s self depend on dialogical self of the individuals who are part of the society. In the above context, it is important to mention the automatic activation of speech lexicon in the individuals and even concurrent activation of multiple lexical candidates. Hence, in case of social context, the individuals respond concurrently though they have different selves, when their perceptions are same or different. However, in the above case, again dialogical self activates itself to express the perception in a social context. Thus the importance of dialogical self in a social context or in the case of social cognitive aspects can be emphasised by the aspect of cross linguistic research that shows sensitivity of speakers and listeners depending on stress units. The aspects of language processing and understanding the dialogue is important for social cognitive aspects and language specific categories in self of an individual play an important role in processing of language in social contexts. Hence, social context or social cognitive aspects need dialogical activities to complete the task involved. Hence, perceptions play an important role in social cognitive aspects as well as dialogical activities, but the different perceptions increase the need of dialogue to develop understanding between individuals. In addition to that the difference in accessibility also plays an important role in developing perceptions in individuals and affects their spoken language, which is a form of dialogical activity (Otake, Cutler, 2006).
Self can be termed as the affect of different contexts and incidents on a person. Martin L. Hoffman (1981, page 67) quotes about social environment that is parallel to social domain’s reaction to the physical environment. It can be termed as the reaction of social context to the self of a person and his/her reactions. The responses of the person include dialogue and the reactions of society to a person depend on his dialogical self though it is a result of social cognitive self he/she is using to interact. In social contexts, people are sensitive and move themselves and one can observe that in the above context, the social cognition can operate under different rules depending on the self of a person or his/her position in the society. However, the response of a person decides the nature of the self and affect of society on it thus emphasising the importance of dialogical self in the social cognitive aspects and development of social cognitive self. The development of social cognitive self is also result of the people who act to sustain themselves as well as their offsprings and in the above course of actions, perceptions, emotions, learning, thoughts, as well as mental abilities play an important role. Consequently, the dialogical self of persons comes to the fore with the help of social cognitive self’s actions for sustainability of a person and his/her associates. Hence, the several factors that contribute to complexity and difficulties involved in social cognition will make the social cognitive self a reality regarding an individual. However, M.l.Hoffman (1981, page 68) mentions interactional context, within which social cognition usually operates and thus indirectly emphasises the role of dialogical activities in social cognitive contexts. Using the dialogical activities, the individuals in a society react according to their inner states that are unpredictable and unobservable. However, the dialogical aspects help to some extent to understand the inner states of a person regarding social cognitive aspects. In the above context, the relationships between persons decide the emotions associated with and they are expressed through dialogue, which again brings dialogical self as part of cognitive activities. The level of emotions decides the nature of the dialogues and in turn they decide the physical features of verbal communications thus integrating social cognitive self and dialogical self. Hence, social cognitive self develops by deriving the meaning from verbal and other cues. The intensity of verbal communication may result in effectiveness in cognitive processing and thus physical features of verbal communications are part of social cognitive activities as well as self (Martin, L. Hoffman, 1981).
In addition to the above activities Social Cognition normally is about people, groups, and social events and is coloured by feelings, motives, attitudes and emotional states. In the above context, Stephen, M. Kosslyn., Jerome, Kagan (1981, page 82) mentions about the basic phenomenon in mental image processing. The mental image processing represents brain and the processing of information in it. However, the information processed in the brain is the response to the interaction between individuals in a society and the responses are due to the perceptions of the contexts and situations. Hence, it is evident that people take time to examine the subjectivity of smaller images by looking and explanation through interaction associated with looking can have a better understanding. Hence, in understanding and processing the cognitive aspects of a society, the interaction is important even in the case of understanding the subjectivity of images. When the people have understanding about images to depict the objects in a spatial medium, the nature of arising of representations can be explained through interaction. Hence, in almost all the cases of social cognitive and dialogical activities they are associated with one another, which give a clear indication for integration of two paradigms. In addition to that the important features of development of social cognition are experiencing and understanding the representations of social contexts. The language like propositional representations helps the individuals to involve in interaction thus forcing them to use dialogical self (Kosslyin, Kagan, 1981).
According to Vance, Locke and Lucy, Johnston (2001, page 124), perceptions and attitudes are important for any individual to survive in a society and social cognition is important for the above mentioned perceptions and attitudes. Here two systems are involved; one being visual and other being auditory system. However, Locke and Johnston consider that the latter is more sensitive to the frequencies at which individuals typically speak. Hence, it is important to note that the human mind is tuned to social surroundings according to the individuals’ social cognition. Hence a term social mind arises as part of the mind’s activities, which is comprised of social cognition aspects. In the above context, stereotypes on judgments of others as well as fixed beliefs and the changes in them according to the nature of the society are significant as they decide the interactions between individuals. Hence, social cognition involves mental representations of social groups and the members, who have enough details of fellow individuals. The social cognition aspects include the details of individuals as well as animals and furniture and the mental categories act upon stereotypes on judgment and behaviour. Even prejudice also is part of aspects of social cognition as individuals develop it for protecting their social setup. In this context, the perceptions and the interactions between individuals of same society matter and if they dominate the interactions between individuals of different societies, the prejudice arise. Hence, the nature of dialogical activities between individuals decides the extent of prejudice in them. Hence it is important to explore the subtleties of prejudice and that again involves interactions between individuals. Hence, in the above context it is important to understand the modern approaches to explanation of stereotypes as there is relationship between stereotypes and prejudice. Locke and Johnston (2001, page 125) mention the explicit role of prejudiced people talk accordingly to guide their judgments and the implicit role that influence the judgments. In both the cases the dialogical activities play an important role but in the former case, the dialogical activities are interactive and in the context of latter, the individuals listen and then act. However, it is to be noted both are the cases of social cognition, which include interactions and listening the dialogical activities find place. The aspect that is not connected with dialogical activities in case of social cognition activities is introspection of a person and the capacity to introspect arises from the knowledge gained by interactions as well as readings. The introspection followed by dialogical activities may bring forth like or dislike for a particular social group and that judgment decides the interaction between the groups. Locke and Johnston (2001, page 126) quote about the cognitive psychology, which deals with the reports of the people about their perceptions. The above aspect is used by social psychologists to interact with the people and to understand their social cognitive standards and nature (Locke and Johnston, 2001).
In addition to the above cognitive standards and nature mentioned above; the real, material conflicts of interest between various societal groups take place. In this context, Michael, J. Platow and John, A. Hunter (2001, page 211) states that conflict approach has the assumption of the reality of group life and its different forms of material competition. As the material competition needs desired resources, the approach differs in different contexts and in each context; it needs a dialogue to deal with the situation thus again resulting in integration of social cognitive self and dialogical self of an individual. In this context, Platow and Hunter (2001) quote the non-reductionist approach to prejudice in the society, which is responsible for recognition of social groups and part of social cognitive self. Hence, the understanding of prejudice is part of understanding of social cognitive self of an individual and that is being expressed in interaction between individuals belonging to same social group or from different groups. As mentioned earlier in the paper, interactions involve dialogue between individuals and the knowledge about dialogical self paradigm is necessary to understand the social cognitive self of individual and any social group. The consideration of dialogical self of an individual while understanding his/her social cognitive self is due to the consideration of ongoing dynamics between groups as a whole or between individuals as there exists quest in each of them to satisfy the group based needs and desires. In understanding the integration between social cognitive self and dialogical self paradigms, the prejudice and social conflict between different societies and individuals can be a good aspect as it is part of social cognitive identification as well as the one that decides the interaction between individuals. Platow and Hunter (2001, page 212) explain prejudice as the most well known and influential social psychological proponent of the realistic intergroup conflict perspective as well as discrimination. Hence, the integration of social cognitive self and dialogical self paradigms is possible if prejudice and discrimination as well as perceptions are considered in understanding social cognition in individuals with the help of their interactions, which are indicators of dialogical self or dialogical activities. Moreover, one can understand that the integration of social cognitive self and dialogical self paradigms is part of study of human social behaviour to recognise an individual as a social category member and to behave accordingly (Platow and Hunter, 2001).
Conclusion
The discussion and analysis in the paper concludes that the integration of social cognitive self and dialogical self paradigms is possible as understanding the social cognition of individuals need interaction, which expresses the dialogical self. Hence, both the paradigms are interrelated and are flexible to integrate with each other. However, it is important to note that is comfortable to integrate dialogical self with social cognitive self paradigm instead of in opposite manner. The above fact holds strong because, the understanding of social cognition involves the interaction and individuals express the dialogical self in it.
Reference
International Society of Dialogical Sciences (ISDS). (2008). The Fifth International Conference on Dialogical Self. [Online]. Web.
Jaan, Valsiner., Gyuseog Han. 2008. Where is Culture within the Dialogical.
Joseph, P. Forgas. (2001). Handbook of Affect and Social Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Martin, L. Hoffman. (1981). Perspectives on the difference between Understanding People and Understanding Things: the Role of Affect. In John H. Flavell., Lee Ross (Eds) Social cognitive development: frontiers and possible futures. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Michael, J. Platow and John, A. Hunter. (2001). Realistic Intergroup Conflict: Prejudice, Power and Protest. In Augoustinos, Martha., Reynolds, Katherine, Jane. (Eds) Understanding Prejudice, Racism and Social Conflict. London: Sage Publications.
Nandita, Chaudary. 2008. Persistent Patterns in Cultural Negotiations of theSelf: Using Dialogical Self Theory to Understand Self-Other Dynamics within Culture. International Journal for Dialogical Science. [Online]. 3 (1). Web.
Perspectives on the Self? International Journal for Dialogical Science. [Online]. 3 (1). Web.
Roxanne, J. Fand. (1999). The dialogic self: reconstructing subjectivity in Woolf, Lessing, and Atwood. London: Associated University Press.
Stephen, M. Kosslyn.,Jerome, Kagan. (1981). “Concrete Thinking” and the development of Social Cognition. In John H. Flavell., Lee, Ross. (Eds) Social Cognitive development: Frontiers and Possible Futures. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Takashi, Otake., Anne, Cutler. (2006). Evidence Against “Units of Perception”. In Alexandra, Columbus. (Eds) Leading edge research in cognitive psychology. New York, USA: Nova Science Publishers Inc.
Vance, Locke and Lucy, Johnston. (2001). Stereotyping and Prejudice: A social Cognitive Approach. In Augoustinos, Martha., Reynolds, Katherine, Jane. (Eds) Understanding Prejudice, Racism and Social Conflict. London: Sage Publications.