Social Classes and Their Impact on People's Sense of Self - Essay Example

Social es and its impact on peoples sense of self Social divisions become principles of division organizing the image of the social world. Many social thinkers have tackled the problem of social change in general and the impact of this change on the role of class differentiation in particular. Several researches suggest that the people’s sense of self of the self esteem is linked to the social classes they belong to. This paper examines this relationship and also gives an account of the methods of tracing the influence of class. Before we get into the discussions of impact of social classes on the people’s sense of self, let us first define the social classes. Social class refers to the ranking of people into a hierarchy within a culture. The idea of social class entered the English lexicon about the 1770s, with no specific originator. Many sociologists and historians see that "higher" classes control subordinate classes. At times, social class can be related to elitism, and those in the higher class are usually known as the "social elite". This ranking may be legal, as in former Indian castes, or abstract. Various schools of sociology differ in postulating which social traits are significant enough to define a class. The relative importance and definition of membership in a particular class differs greatly over time and between societies, particularly in societies that have a legal differentiation of groups of people by birth or occupation. In the well-known example of socioeconomic class, many scholars view societies as stratifying into a hierarchical system based on economic status, wealth, or income ("social class.", 2006). Based on social anthropology, Warner divided American into three classes (upper, middle, and lower), then further subdivided each of these into an "upper" and "lower" segment, with the following postulates: Upper-upper class. "Old money." People who have been born into and raised with wealth. Lower-upper class. "New money." Individuals who have become rich within their own lifetimes. Upper-middle class. High-salaried professionals (i.e., doctors, lawyers, corporate executives). Lower-middle class. Lower-paid professionals, but not manual laborers (i.e., police officers, non-management office workers, small business owners). Upper-lower class. Blue-collar workers and manual laborers. Also known as the "working class." Lower-lower class. The homeless and permanently unemployed, as well as the "working poor." To Warner, American social class was based more on attitudes than on the actual amount of money an individual made. For example, the richest people in America would belong to the "lower-upper class" since many of them created their own fortunes; one can only be born into the highest class. Nonetheless, members of the wealthy upper-upper class tend to be more powerful, as a simple survey of U.S. presidents may demonstrate (i.e., the Roosevelts; John Kennedy; the Bushes) (Wikipedia, 2006). When sociologists speak of "class" they usually mean economically based classes in modern or near pre-modern society. Modern usage of the word "class" outside of Marxism generally considers only the relative wealth of individuals or social groups, and not the ownership of the means of production. After the Industrial Revolution a great deal of snobbery arose in Europe and its former colonies as to whether ones occupation got one dirty or not. Jobs became know as white collar if they were clean and safe, or blue collar if they posed a physical threat and got one dirty. Some people maintain this distinction, separating the middle class of workers into white or blue collar. Upper class- live off investments and do not work Upper middle class- work in clean, safe environments and have a degree of economic freedom Lower middle class- work in dirty, dangerous environments and have a degree of economic freedom Lower class- are entirely dependent on pleasing employers and landlords in order to survive The sociologist Max Weber formulated a three-component theory of stratification, with social, status and party classes (or politics) as conceptually distinct elements. All three dimensions have consequences for what Weber called "life chances". Class is based on economic relationship to the market (owner, rentier, employee etc.) Status has to do with non-economic qualities like honor and prestige Party refers to factors having to do with affiliations in the political domain ("social class.", 2006). Impact of social class on peoples sense of self We are living in an era that calls for an emphasis on diversity. Numerous interest groups have emerged demanding special consideration and/or "equality" in every walk of life, starting from the childhood schooling to the working class. An emphasis on race, religious differences, social status or physical disabilities usually focuses on the importance of treating people who seem different from us equally and fairly. The basic idea is that every person has a right to be treated without prejudice, and that people should not be discriminated against because of race, religion, or physical disability (Elder, 2004). Self-esteem is a widely used concept both in popular language and in psychology. It refers to an individuals sense of his or her value or worth, or the extent to which a person values, approves of, appreciates, prizes, or likes him or herself (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991). The most broad and frequently cited definition of self-esteem within psychology is Rosenbergs (1965), who described it as a favorable or unfavorable attitude toward the self. Self-esteem has been related both to socioeconomic status and to various aspects of health and health-related behavior, as has a related construct, self-efficacy. Among the most popular and well-utilized measures of self-esteem are the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965) and the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (1967/1981). Rosenbergs scale was originally developed to measure adolescents global feelings of self-worth or self-acceptance, and is generally considered the standard against which other measures of self-esteem are compared. It includes 10 items that are usually scored using a four-point response ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The items are face valid, and the scale is short and easy and fast to administer. Extensive and acceptable reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) and validity (convergent and discriminant) information exists for the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991). The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory was developed through research to assess attitude toward oneself in general, and in specific contexts: peers, parents, school, and personal interests. It was originally designed for use with children, drawing on items from scales that were previously used by Carl Rogers. Respondents state whether a set of 50 generally favorable or unfavorable aspects of a person are "like me" or "not like me." There are two forms, a School Form (ages 8-15) and an Adult form (ages 16 and older) (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991; Pervin, 1993). Acceptable reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) and validity (convergent and discriminant) information exists for the Self-Esteem Inventory (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991). Perhaps the most famous investigation into the relationship of self-esteem to SES is Rosenberg and Pearlins (1978) assessment of social class and self-esteem among children and adults. In an effort to clarify decades of inconclusive work on what many thought would be an obvious connection between ones social status or prestige and ones personal sense of worth, Rosenberg and Pearlin suggested that age was a critical factor in teasing apart this relationship. Indeed, they found virtually no association between social class of parents (measured by the Hollingshead Index of Social Position) and self-esteem among younger children, a modest association among adolescents, and a moderate association among adults based on their own social class. They rely on theories about social comparison processes, reflected self-appraisals, self-perception theory, and psychological centrality to explain the age graded relationship. Because the salience of class in the interpersonal context differs for children and adults, and because the social class of children is ascribed while that of adults is generally considered achieved, Rosenberg and Pearlin argue, the extent to which the sense of inequality inherent in the meaning of social class is mirrored within individuals is not the same for children as it is for adults. Coopersmiths (1967) original work was designed to assess the origins of self-esteem in children. The results of this work in which children filled out the Self-Esteem Inventory and provided ratings of their parents, staff members interviewed mothers, and mothers filled out questionnaires, indicated that "external indicators of prestige [of the parents] such as wealth, amount of education, and job title did not have as overwhelming and as significant an effect on self-esteem as is often assumed" (Pervin, 1993). Parental attitudes and behaviors -acceptance of their children, clear and well-enforced demands, and respect for actions within well-defined limits -- were the primary antecedents of childrens sense of self-worth (Adler and Stewart, 2004). Work Cited Adler, N and Stewart, J. “Self-Esteem” 2004. UCSF. 12 January 2006 Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. “Measures of self-esteem”. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes, Volume I, J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.) San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 1991. Coopersmith, S. “The antecedents of self-esteem”. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. (Original work published 1967). 1981. Elder, L. “Diversity: Making Sense of It Through Critical Thinking”.2004. Foundation for Critical Thinking, 12 January 2006 Pervin, L. A. “Personality: Theory and research”. NY: John Wiley and Sons. 1993. Rosenberg, M. “Society and the adolescent self-image”. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 1965. Rosenberg, M., & Pearlin, L. 1. “Social class and self-esteem among children and adults”. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 1978. 53-77. "social class.", Encyclopedia. 2006. Reference.com 12 January 2006 Wikipedia, “Social class” 2006. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.12 January 2006 Read More