The whole world is theater.
There are women, men – all actors.
They have their own exits, exits,
And everyone plays more than one role.
This brilliant idea of W. Shakespeare found its confirmation in the theory of roles, developed in the XX century by representatives of the interactionist direction in psychology. Currently, this theory plays an important role in social psychology, as it largely explains the features of human behavior in society and the problems that arise in him.
Role theory in psychology
For the first time, the concept of social role as the primary structural unit of society was proposed by American sociologists J. Mead and R. Linton in the 30s of the XX century. Later, representatives of social psychology repeatedly turned to this idea, and by the end of the last century it took shape in a rather coherent theory explaining the processes of interaction between man and society.
Role as a function of a person in society
Lions live in prides, wolves live in packs, and people live in social groups. These are communities of individuals united by a common goal and joint activities aimed at achieving it. Any group activity requires the distribution of functions that involve a certain type of behavior, a set of responsibilities, a person’s position in society, etc.
From the point of view of psychology, these functions are the social roles that people play, and society imposes strict requirements on role behavior, since the achievement of a common goal depends on it. There are many such roles in each group, their content is determined by the tasks of general group activities. So, in the school collective there are the roles of students, teachers, director, head teacher, technical assistant, librarian, etc. Since a person usually belongs to different groups in which he performs different functions, he also plays more than one role. It’s not just about formal groups. The same roles exist in the family: husband, wife, son, daughter, mother, father, etc.
Accepting a new role for himself, a person must first of all realize its functional component, that is, understand what contribution he should make to the overall activity, what the community expects from him. Without this, mastering the role is impossible. And if in official groups the functions of each of their members are described in the relevant documents as job duties, then this is not the case in the family. Therefore, a misunderstanding of the functional component of one’s role or a reluctance to understand it leads to inevitable conflicts.
A person’s failure to fulfill his role functions not only causes a negative reaction from the group, social sanctions can be applied to a person: from open condemnation to expulsion from society.
Role as a stereotype of behavior
The role is complex and includes the following components:
- social norms;
- responsibilities related to the performance of group functions;
- human rights as a member of this group;
- role behavior stereotypes.
Behavioral stereotypes ensure the effectiveness of a person’s performance of their role functions, therefore, they are given great importance in the theory of roles. They include the most rational and generally accepted methods and forms of activity and norms of relations with other members of the group. In addition, behavioral stereotypes make the role recognizable, help a person quickly navigate the social environment. We know from childhood what actions should be expected from a doctor, salesperson, hairdresser, teacher, etc. And accepting a new role, it is easier for a person to master exactly the stereotypes of behavior, since he knows in advance how to behave in a given situation.
The two sides of a social role – functional and behavioral – can be represented as follows:
- role, as a function – prescribes what a person needs to do;
- role as a set of behavioral stereotypes – how to do it.
Social roles are not only standardized but impersonal. Of course, each person is a unique personality, and his personality leaves an imprint on role behavior, but this should not go beyond stereotypes. Any social role includes a rigidly defined system of responsibilities, and whoever plays this role does not change the set of requirements. So, the seller can offer us a product with jokes and jokes, but at the same time he must fulfill his functions. And if instead of selling, he teaches us how to dress or raise children, then at least they will not understand him.
The situation with stereotypes of role behavior in a group such as a family is somewhat more complicated. Although there are standards of conduct for husbands, wives, children, grandmothers, grandfathers, fathers, mothers, etc., they are more vague, since they are based on informal traditions and customs, ideological principles and values. Both religious beliefs and emotional relationships influence role behavior in the family. The child learns patterns of such behavior on the example of his family, and in some details (and sometimes significantly) they may differ from what is accepted in other families.
This can cause difficulties in the future when grown-up children decide to start their own families. So, a young man brought up in a family where all responsibilities at home are assigned exclusively to a woman, will expect the same behavior from his chosen one. And, for example, a girl’s request to wash the dishes or vacuum the floor can cause him bewilderment and even resentment.
When communicating with people, we unconsciously expect certain role-playing behavior from them, just as they do from us. These expectations, based on ideas formed in the process of socialization, are called expectations in social psychology. If the expectations do not match due to differences in cultures, beliefs, or family upbringing, then conflict can arise. The mismatch of mutual expectations is one of the most common reasons for the disintegration of young families.
Role types
When it comes to role behavior, they usually talk about social roles, habitually naming all the roles that a person plays in society. But in fact, along with the proper social ones, there are also interpersonal roles. These two types differ in many ways.
Social roles
Social roles are standardized and conventional. The word “conventional” in psychology denotes many social phenomena that are formed in the process of human interaction. “Convention” is translated as “agreement”, and not only roles, but also norms of behavior can be conventional. This, of course, is not about a direct agreement, it is only in the children’s play group that the participants directly agree on the rules of the game.
Usually, conventional norms or roles are formed over a long time, when there is a selection of behavioral stereotypes that are most convenient and effective in group activities. These standards are enshrined and supported not only by public opinion and social control, but also by official documents or laws.
Most of the social roles in modern society have a long history, but new ones are constantly emerging that have not yet fully taken shape. This is due to the emergence of new areas of activity, and hence functions.
Along with simply social ones, socio-demographic roles are also distinguished: husband, wife, father, mother, son, daughter, grandmother, etc. They are less standardized and supported not only by formal laws, but also by customs and traditions. By the way, man and woman – gender roles – also refer to social roles. Their functions and stereotypes of behavior in society are largely biologically determined.
Interpersonal Roles
Unlike impersonal social, interpersonal roles are associated with the individual characteristics of a person and his place in the system of interpersonal relationships. These roles are also regulated not by formal laws, but by emotional relationships.
Each interpersonal role is, in fact, unique, but in the conditions of the long existence of social groups, the process of their typification takes place. That is, certain stereotyped ideas about the content of certain interpersonal roles are being formed in the public consciousness. For example, in each class there is a “beauty first”, “bad guy”, “witty jester”, “crammer”, etc. Such templates are close to the concept of “acting role”.
Despite the fact that interpersonal roles are not clear-cut, they are more stable than social ones. After all, social roles are associated with functions, and it is enough for a person to change his functions in a group, as his role will also change. A student, having graduated from a university, can become a teacher, and a daughter, with age, can marry and take on the role of a wife, and then a mother.
Changing the interpersonal role is not easy because it is tied to the individual’s personality. And it is it that needs to be changed if you are not satisfied with the position in the group. But even in this case, the familiar image of your role will remain with those around you for a long time. Thus, the “first beauty” by the 10-11th grade can grow up and become a rather mediocre girl, but the attitude towards her in the class will remain. And the noteworthy wit and jester, who entertained classmates for a long time, may eventually begin to be weighed down by his role. He would be glad to change it, but it does not work – no one takes him seriously.
The social roles that one individual plays are varied, since a person is a member of different groups. Interpersonal roles are determined by individual, personal qualities, but they can also be different. Thus, a man who plays the role of a tyrant-tyrant in the family, in the company of friends, can be a modest, timid and even cowardly “errand boy”.
Role and status
Role must be distinguished from status. Status is a person’s position in society, in the hierarchy of social or interpersonal relations. Status is based both on the functions and on the personal characteristics of the individual and is determined by the quality of the person performing social functions, his value, significance for society. Although status is associated with role behavior, it is not determined by the role – people performing the same functions, and therefore playing the same roles in a group, can have completely different social status.
If the basis of the social role is the function of a person in the group, the interpersonal role is formed on the basis of emotional-evaluative relations, then the status is based on authority, on the degree of influence of the individual on other people in the group.
When it comes to role-playing behavior, associations may arise with acting, a kind of deliberate pretense, when a person puts on a mask to deceive other people. This type of behavior also occurs, for example, when a husband and wife on the brink of divorce, in front of strangers, play the role of spouses in love.
But nevertheless, “playing out” roles in society is not a deception, such behavior is determined by the laws of the development of society, that is, it is objectively necessary. And a person’s role-playing behavior is prompted not by his own whim or self-interest, but by the conscious need to fulfill his social functions and take a certain place in the system of social and interpersonal relations.
