Can an episodic approach to social identification account for identification as interaction between individual and collective identity work in an increasingly flexible and transient identity formation context?

A review of available literature suggests that social identification exists at the interface between individual and collective identity work. This poster proposes that it is the interaction between these two processes that leads a person to define themselves in terms of their membership of a particular social group. The poster suggests that identity work undertaken by the group (or ‘the creation of identities as widely understood signs with a set of rules and conventions for their use’, Schwalbe & Mason-Schrock, 1996, p.115), can be used by a person to inform their own individual identity work and, from this, the extent of alignment between their identity and the perceived identity of the group. In stable or internally-structured groups collective identity work may simply take the form of communication and preservation of dominant collective identities. However, in unstable, new or transitional groups, interaction between individual and collective identity work may be more dynamic, as both collective and individual identities are simultaneously codified, enacted and refined. To develop an understanding of social identification that is applicable in both stable and transitional social groups, it is useful to consider recent proposals that identification may occur cyclically as a series of discrete episodes (Ashforth, Harrison & Corley, 2008). This poster draws on the literature to present these suggestions in greater detail, outlining propositions for social identification that are relevant to transient as well as stable identity formation, supported by suggestion of how episodes of social identification may lead to a person identifying with a group.

A critical evaluation of theories of nationalism

This thesis considers the main theoretical positions within the contemporary sociology of nationalism. These can be grouped into two basic types, primordialist theories which assert that nationalism is an inevitable aspect of all human societies, and modernist theories which assert that nationalism and the nation-state first developed within western Europe in recent centuries. With respect to primordialist approaches to nationalism, it is argued that the main common explanation offered is human biological propensity. Consideration is concentrated on the most recent and plausible of such theories, sociobiology. Sociobiological accounts root nationalism and racism in genetic programming which favours close kin, or rather to the redirection of this programming in complex societies, where the social group is not a kin group. It is argued that the stated assumptions of the sociobiologists do not entail the conclusions they draw as to the roots of nationalism, and that in order to arrive at such conclusions further and implausible assumptions have to be made. With respect to modernists, the first group of writers who are considered are those, represented by Carlton Hayes, Hans Kohn and Elie Kedourie, whose main thesis is that the nation-state and nationalism are recent phenomena. Next, the two major attempts to relate nationalism and the nation-state to imperatives specific either to capitalist societies (in the `orthodox' marxist theory elaborated about the turn of the twentieth century) or to the processes of modernisation and industrialisation (the `Weberian' account of Ernest Gellner) are discussed. It is argued that modernist accounts can only be sustained by starting from a definition of nationalism and the nation-state which conflates such phenomena with others which are specific to the modern world. The marxist and Gellner accounts form the necessary starting point for any explanation as to why the nation-state is apparently the sole viable form of polity in the modern world, but their assumption that no pre-modern society was national leaves them without an adequate account of the earliest origins of the nation-state and of nationalism. Finally, a case study from the history of England argues both the achievement of a national state form and the elucidation of crucial components of a nationalist ideology were attained at a period not consistent with any of the versions of the modernist thesis.

An activity theory approach to strategy as practice

This chapter introduces activity theory as an approach for studying strategy as practice. Activity theory conceptualizes the ongoing construction of activity as a product of activity systems, comprising the actor, the community with which that actor interacts and those symbolic and material tools that mediate between actors, their community and their pursuit of activity. The focus on the mediating role of tools and cultural artefacts in human activity seems especially promising for advancing the strategy-as-practice agenda, for example as a theoretical resource for the growing interest in sociomateriality and the role of tools and artefacts in (strategy) practice (for example, Balogun et al. 2014; Lanzara 2009; Nicolini 2009; Spee and Jarzabkowski 2009; Stetsenko 2005). Despite its potential, in a recent review Vaara and Whittington (2012) identified only three strategy-as-practice articles explicitly applying an activity theory lens. In the wider area of practice-based studies in organizations, activity theory has been slightly more popular (for example, Blackler 1993; 1995; Blackler, Crump and McDonald 2000; Engeström, Kerosuo and Kajamaa 2007; Groleau 2006; Holt 2008; Miettinen and Virkkunen 2005). It still lags behind its potential, however, primarily because of its origins as a social psychology theory developed in Russia with little initial recognition outside the Russian context, particularly in the area of strategy and organization theory, until recently (Miettinen, Samra-Fredericks and Yanow 2009). This chapter explores activity theory as a resource for studying strategy as practice as it is socially accomplished by individuals in interaction with their wider social group and the artefacts of interaction. In particular, activity theory’s focus on actors as social individuals provides a conceptual basis for studying the core question in strategy-as-practice research: what strategy practitioners do. The chapter is structured in three parts. First, an overview of activity theory is provided. Second, activity theory as a practice-based approach to studying organizational action is introduced and an activity system conceptual framework is developed. Third, the elements of the activity system are explained in more detail and explicitly linked to each of the core SAP concepts: practitioners, practices and praxis. In doing so, links are made to existing strategy-as-practice research, with brief empirical examples of topics that might be addressed using activity theory. Throughout the chapter, we introduce key authors in the development of activity theory and its use in management and adjacent disciplinary fields, as further resources for those wishing to make greater use of activity theory.

Connecting a sociology of childhood perspective with the study of child health, illness and wellbeing:introduction

In the last decades we have seen a growing interest in research into children's own experiences and understandings of health and illness. This development, we would argue, is much stimulated by the sociology of childhood which has drawn our attention to how children as a social group are placed and perceived within the structure of society, and within inter-generational relations, as well as how children are social agents and co-constructors of their social world. Drawing on this tradition, we here address some cross-cutting themes that we think are important to further the study of child health: situating children within health policy, drawing attention to practices around children's health and well-being and a focus on children as health actors. The paper contributes to a critical analysis of child health policy and notions of child health and normality, pointing to theoretical and empirical research potential for the sociology of children's health and illness.

Heteroglossia

Heteroglossia refers to Mikhail Bakhtin's concept of multiple speech practices that operate within a community or social group at any given historical moment. Most communities are characterized by heteroglossia in that they comprise a range of languages, discourses, voices, and viewpoints that continuously compete for authority and power. This article identifies the philosophical background of heteroglossia, its various alternative forms and versions, key related concepts, and examples of research studies that have developed the original concept.

Connecting a sociology of childhood perspective with the study of child health, illness and wellbeing:introduction

This chapter focuses on concepts and theoretical points of departure found in child health and wellbeing studies. Firstly, seeing children as a social group draws attention to the ways this group is placed and perceived in the structures of societies. Children as a social group need to be understood in relation to other social groups. Secondly, understanding children as social agents and as co-constructors of their social worlds is fundamental to studying their experiences and ways of dealing with health and wellbeing in everyday life. Thirdly, in recent years, there has been a turn towards seeing children as beings. The chapter discusses the child health issues and concerns in contemporary society. Children are diagnosed with an increasing range of conditions and are subject to more and more elaborate child health and welfare interventions, reflecting a medical perspective on the changing panorama of illness and health risks in the 21st century.

Institutions matter: essays on the determinants and consequences of socio-political institutions

ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY WITH PRIOR ARRANGEMENT This thesis seeks to contribute to the socio-political literature. It comprises of three individual chapters examining the determinants and consequences of different social-political institutional factors. Specifically, the first study combines game theoretical and empirical techniques to examine how bureaucrats favour other agents within their social group and the effects this will have on the level of corruption in the economy. To this end, I develop a simple model of allocation of time between economic activities and leisure (time spent building social network ties), to illustrate the underlying causal mechanism between social network and corruption. It shows that large social networks and low levels of economic activities provides the condition for high levels of corruption. However, the ability of the government to punish corruption through well-established laws and property rights enforcement acts as a deterrent to corruption. he second work also combines game theoretical and empirical techniques. It aims to clarify the relationship between the degree of competition and political influence of firms, paying particular attention to the level of government regulations that exist in the countries in which the firms operates. The interplay between economic and political institutions is vital to any analysis on understanding the workings of political influence. The third study is purely empirical. It examines the role of two types of business network, namely, political connections and business group affiliations on a firm’s performance. Evidence was provided on Chinese firms’ performance during the 2008 financial crisis.

Group consensus in social influence:type of consensus information as a moderator of majority and minority influence

Three experiments investigated the effect of consensus information on majority and minority influence. Experiment 1 examined the effect of consensus expressed by descriptive adjectives (large vs. small) on social influence. A large source resulted in more influence than a small source, irrespective of source status (majority vs. minority). Experiment 2 showed that large sources affected attitudes heuristically, whereas only a small minority instigated systematic processing of the message. Experiment 3 manipulated the type of consensus information, either in terms of descriptive adjectives (large, small) or percentages (82%, 18%, 52%, 48%). When consensus was expressed in terms of descriptive adjectives, the findings of Experiments 1 and 2 were replicated (large sources were more influential than small sources), but when consensus was expressed in terms of percentages, the majority was more influential than the minority, irrespective of group consensus.