When we are born, we have a genetic makeup and biological traits. However, who we are as human beings develops through social interaction. Many scholars, both in the fields of psychology and sociology, have described the process of self-development as a precursor to understanding how that self becomes socialized. Psychologists and psychoanalysts, such as Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), Erik Erikson (1902–1994), and Jean Piaget (1896–1980), provided some of the initial understandings of the self within the social sciences. In this section, we will focus on how sociologists have understood the self.

Cooley and the Looking-Glass Self

Charles Cooley (1864–1929) argued our development of a self is similar to looking through a looking glass. According to looking-glass self theory, we base our image on what we think other people see (Cooley 1902). We imagine how we must appear to others, and then react to this speculation. We wear certain clothes, prepare our hair in a particular manner, wear makeup, use cologne, and the like, all based on the notion that our presentation of ourselves is going to affect how others perceive us. We expect a certain reaction, and, if we’re lucky, we get the one we desire and feel good about it. Yet we have no way of knowing what other people are thinking and if they are responding to our presentations. Regardless, Cooley believed that our sense of self is based upon this idea: we imagine how we look to others, draw conclusions based upon what we think other people are thinking about, and then develop our sense of self. In other words, people’s reactions to us are like partial mirrors in which we are reflected (figure 4.5).

Mead and the Stages of Self-Development

Later, George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) studied the self, a person’s distinct identity that is developed through social interaction. Mead argued that our selves have two components, an “I” and a “Me.” The “I” is our creative, novel response to a situation. The “Me” is the part of our self that accounts for the larger social world. Our self is an internal dialogue between these two components. In most situations, our “Me” prevails because of how we are socialized.

To engage in this process of self, an individual has to be able to view themself through the eyes of others. That’s not an ability that we are born with (Mead 1934). Through socialization, we learn to put ourselves in someone else’s position and look at the world through their perspective. This assists us in becoming self-aware, as we look at ourselves from the perspective of the “other.”

How do we go from being newborns to being humans with “selves”? Mead believed that there is a specific path of development that all people go through. During the preparatory stage, children are only capable of imitation: they cannot imagine how others see things. They copy the actions of people with whom they regularly interact, such as their caregivers. This is followed by the play stage, during which children begin to take on the role that one other person might have. For example, children might play dress-up and act out the “mom” role or talk on a toy cell phone the way they see adults do. This is taking the role of a particular other.

During the game stage, children learn to consider several roles at the same time and how those roles interact with each other (figure 4.6). They learn to understand interactions involving different people with a variety of purposes. For example, a child at this stage is likely to be aware of the different responsibilities of people in a restaurant who together make for a smooth dining experience (someone seats you, another takes your order, someone else cooks the food, while yet another clears away dirty dishes).

Finally, children develop, understand, and learn the idea of the generalized other, the common behavioral expectations of general society. By this stage of development, individuals can imagine how they are viewed by one or many others—and thus, from a sociological perspective, to have a “self” (Mead 1934; Mead 1964).

W. E. B. Du Bois and the Double Consciousness

First introduced in Chapter 2, W. E. B. Du Bois made great contributions to sociology and our understanding of race. You’ll remember that he was the first sociologist who studied race. The concept of race was central to his theories and research. In The Souls of Black Folk, Du Bois (1903) developed the concept of double consciousness to explain the conflicting identities experienced by Black people in the United States. He talks about a sense of “two-ness.” For Black Americans, they have two competing identities—one as a Black person, the other as an American in a White-centric America.

We will apply Du Bois’s concept of double consciousness in the next section, “Activity: Race and Double Consciousness: Examining Representations within Media.”

Activity: Race and Double Consciousness: Examining Representations within Media

Let’s look at representations of race and double consciousness in the media. Please read or listen to a short four-minute article, “Issa Rae Turns Basic Into Revolutionary With ‘Insecure’ [Website],” then return to answer the questions that follow (figure 4.7).

1. What is double consciousness? How does double consciousness relate to self and socialization?
2. Are there other social institutions, such as the media, in which we see a lack of representation? If we conceptualize the media as an agent of socialization, how might this be a problem?
3. Why might national and racial identities be fraught with tension?

Goffman and the Presentation of Self

Sociologist Erving Goffman presented the idea that a person is like an actor on a stage and that we can use the metaphor of theater to understand social life (figure 4.8). Calling his theory dramaturgy, Goffman believed that we use “impression management” to present ourselves to others as we hope to be perceived. Each situation is a new scene, and individuals perform different selves depending on who is present (Goffman 1959). Think about the way you behave around your coworkers versus the way you behave around your grandparents versus the way you behave with a blind date. Even if you’re not consciously trying to alter your personality, your grandparents, coworkers, and date probably see different sides of you.

From this perspective, social life can be divided into different regions. In front-stage regions, we carry out our performances. In backstage regions, we prepare for our performances. Think about the building where you attend your sociology class. The classroom is a front stage region where you and your professors carry out your classes. Within the building, there are several backstage regions. The offices of your professors allow them to prepare for class. Bathrooms are also another backstage region within the building. However, there are aspects of behavior in public bathrooms that may be more front-stage (Cahill et al. 1985). Stepping outside of your college campus, you can see this division of interactional space within the home (Collett and Child 2009), restaurants (Grazian 2007), or even tourist attractions (MacCannell 1976).

Similar to a play, people will also use props to help carry out their performances. For example, a judge in a courtroom wears a robe and uses a gavel to create an impression of fairness, gravity, and control. Those entering the courtroom are expected to adhere to the scene being set. Imagine the impression that can be made by how a person dresses. This is why attorneys frequently select the hairstyles and apparel worn by witnesses and defendants in courtroom proceedings.

In terms of performances of gender identity, Goffman maintained that gender differences are only significant because culture makes them so. He argued that children acquire normative gendered interaction patterns as a result of differential treatment by parents based on the sex of the child. He argued against seeing gender differences as natural. Rather, he saw gender as something constructed in rituals of everyday interactions, which must be accounted for when attempting to change gender power relations.

Identity Theory

Let’s go back to the beginning of the chapter and the list of responses you came up with when asked, “Who are you?” As you probably noticed, you have a lot of different selves or identities, and these selves are connected to interactions with other people.

Some of the responses you provided are probably roles. Roles are patterns of behavior that are representative of a person’s social status. Did you list any of the roles you have in your family? You may be a brother, sister, child, grandchild, mother, father, aunt, uncle, or serve in some other role. If you listed something related to where you work, you may be an assistant, teammember, manager, or fill another role..

Given that you have multiple identities and selves, is there any consistency in your actions across different situations? Sociologists argue yes, and it is associated with identity salience. Identity salience is “the subjective importance or value that persons attach to the various roles that they accept as self-defining” (Thoits 2012:362). This means that some identities are closer to how we define ourselves and are more likely to come up in our interactions with other people. Going back to your list, are there any identities/selves that you see as more central to who you are? When you have choices between different activities associated with particular identities, which do you choose?

Licenses and Attributions for Theories of Self and Identity

Open Content, Original

“Theories of Self and Identity” by Matthew Gougherty is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

“W.E.B. Du Bois and the Double Consciousness” by Jennifer Puentes is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

“Activity: Race and Double Consciousness: Examining Representations within Media” by Jennifer Puentes is adapted from Issa Rae Turns Basic Into Revolutionary With ‘Insecure’ by NPR, and is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Modifications including framing activity and writing questions.

Open Content, Shared Previously

“Roles” definition from “Ch. 4 Key Terms” by Heather Griffiths and Nathan Keirns in Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

“Theories of Self and Identity”introductory paragraph is from “5.1 Theories of Self Development” by Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang in Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Last two sentences added.

“Cooley and the Looking Glass Self” and “Mead and the Stages of Development”’ are from “5.1 Theories of Self Development” by Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang in Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Modifications include editing sections on Cooley and Mead for clarity and consistency; adding section on I vs. me.

“Goffman and the Presentation of Self” introductory paragraph and third paragraph are modified from “4.3 Social Construction of Reality” by Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang in Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Edited for consistency and clarity.

Figure 4.5. “Shallow Focus of Person Holding Mirror” by Vince Fleming is shared under the Unsplash License.

Figure 4.6. “Children Playing Soccer” by Adria Crehuet Cano is shared under the Unsplash License.

Figure 4.8. “Red and Yellow Stage” by Barry Weatherall is shared under the Unsplash License.

All Rights Reserved Content

Figure 4.7. Image from Issa Rae Turns Basic Into Revolutionary With ‘Insecure’ by NPR is included under fair use.