Eleni Andreouli

Using Identity and Recognition as a Framework to Understand and Promote the Resilience of Caregiving Children in Western Kenya

Children around the world have been observed to assume caregiving responsibilities when a parent or other family members fall ill. Whilst the circumstances surrounding caregiving children in Anglophone countries have been looked at in detail, we know relatively little about how children in Africa experience young caregiving. This paper seeks to further our understanding of caregiving children in Africa by looking at how local constructions of childhood can facilitate their agency and resilience, paying particular attention to the role of identity and recognition. The study involved 48 caregiving children from Western Kenya who through individual interviews, photography and draw-and-write compositions articulated their experiences. The views of ten local adults have also been included. A thematic analysis revealed that caregiving children in Kenya are active participants in community life. Their participation is encouraged by local understandings of childhood and recognition of their efforts, enabling the children to construct positive identities that enhance their resilience. The paper argues that the way in which caregiving children in Kenya respond to their circumstances is influenced by a social recognition of their activities and agency. This recognition, mediated by local representations of childhood, allows the children to construct positive social identities that facilitate resilience. We conclude that there is a need for policy and practice on young caregiving, in all countries and contexts, to consider the role of social recognition and local constructions of childhood in shaping the resilience of caregiving children.

Identity and acculturation: The case of naturalised citizens in Britain

This paper advances a dialogical perspective on acculturation. Drawing on the theories of social representations and dialogical self, it conceptualises acculturation as a process of negotiation between different or conflicting social representations and identity positions. It is argued that, in order to understand acculturation, we need to explore how migrants represent different cultures and how they position themselves towards them. Drawing on 33 interviews with new British citizens, the paper examines how participants made sense of their place in Britain by studying the meanings of acculturation for participants themselves. In the interviews British culture was represented in a polyphasic way incorporating both negative and positive values. Therefore, acculturation represented both an enrichment of identity and an identity threat for many of the participants. Participants negotiated their position within this representational field by engaging in a dialogical negotiation between identity positions. The paper concludes that a dialogical approach to knowledge construction (social representations theory) and identity (dialogical self theory) provides appropriate theoretical tools for understanding acculturation as an ongoing process, not a single static outcome.

The Cambridge Handbook of Social Representations

A social representations approach offers an empirical utility for addressing myriad social concerns such as social order, ecological sustainability, national identity, racism, religious communities, the public understanding of science, health and social marketing. The core aspects of social representations theory have been debated over many years and some still remain widely misunderstood. This handbook provides an overview of these core aspects and brings together theoretical strands and developments in the theory, some of which have become pillars in the social sciences in their own right. Academics and students in the social sciences working with concepts and methods such as social identity, discursive psychology, positioning theory, semiotics, attitudes, risk perception and social values will find this an invaluable resource.

Social representations and the politics of participation

Recent work has called for the integration of different perspectives into the field of political psychology (Haste, 2012). This chapter suggests that one possible direction that such efforts can take is studying the role that social representations theory (SRT) can play in understanding political participation and social change. Social representations are systems of commonsense knowledge and social practice; they provide the lens through which to view and create social and political realities, mediate people’s relations with these sociopolitical worlds and defend cultural and political identities. Social representations are therefore key for conceptualising participation as the activity that locates individuals and social groups in their sociopolitical world. Political participation is generally seen as conditional to membership of sociopolitical groups and therefore is often linked to citizenship. To be a citizen of a society or a member of any social group one has to participate as such. Often political participation is defined as the ability to communicate one’s views to the political elite or to the political establishment (Uhlaner, 2001), or simply explicit involvement in politics and electoral processes (Milbrath, 1965). However, following scholars on ideology (Eagleton, 1991; Thompson, 1990) and social knowledge (Jovchelovitch, 2007), we extend our understanding of political participation to all social relations and also develop a more agentic model where individuals and groups construct, develop and resist their own views, ideas and beliefs. We thus adopt a broader approach to participation in comparison to other political-psychological approaches, such as personality approaches (e.g. Mondak and Halperin, 2008) and cognitive approaches or, more recently, neuropsychological approaches (Hatemi and McDermott, 2012). We move away from a focus on the individual’s political behaviour and its antecedents and outline an approach that focuses on the interaction between psychological and political phenomena (Deutsch and Kinnvall, 2002) through examining the politics of social knowledge.

The role of schools in promoting inclusive communities in contexts of diversity.

Against the background of evidence for links between ill-health and prejudice, in this article we discuss how to promote inclusive communities in contexts of diversity. A brief critical overview of dominant psychological approaches to prejudice reduction reveals the apolitical nature of these approaches, and thus, we argue for a more contextual and political model on how to promote inclusive communities. Drawing on examples of different school practices on cultural diversity from across England, we argue that we need to develop a perspective that connects local contexts of everyday practice, resistance and agency to the institutional and structural realities of prejudice.

Social representations: a revolutionary paradigm

Against the prevailing view that progress in science is characterized by the progressive accumulation of knowledge, Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions of 1962 introduced the idea of revolutionary paradigm shifts. For Kuhn, everyday science is normal science in which scientists are engaged in problem solving activities set in the context of a widely accepted paradigm that constitutes a broad acceptance of a fundamental theoretical framework, an agreement on researchable phenomena and on the appropriate methodology. But, on occasions normal science throws up vexing issues and anomalous results. In response, some scientists carry on regardless, while others begin to lose confidence in the paradigm and look to other options, namely rival paradigms. As more and more scientists switch allegiance to the rival paradigm, the revolution gathers pace, supported by the indoctrination of students through lectures, academic papers and textbooks. In response to critics, including Lakatos who suggested that his depiction reduced scientific progress to mob psychology, Kuhn offered a set of criteria that contributed to the apparent ‘gestalt switch’ from the old to the new paradigm. But that is another story, as indeed is Kuhn’s claim that the social sciences are pre-paradigmatic – in other words, that the only consensus is that there is no consensus.

Everyday cosmopolitanism in representations of Europe among young Romanians in Britain

The article presents an analysis of everyday cosmopolitanism in constructions of Europe among young Romanian nationals living in Britain. Adopting a social representations approach, cosmopolitanism is understood as a cultural symbolic resource that is part of everyday knowledge. Through a discursively oriented analysis of focus group data, we explore the ways in which notions of cosmopolitanism intersect with images of Europeanness in the accounts of participants. We show that, for our participants, representations of Europe are anchored in an Orientalist schema of West-vs.-East, whereby the West is seen as epitomising European values of modernity and progress, while the East is seen as backward and traditional. Our findings further show that representations of cosmopolitanism reinforce this East/West dichotomy, within a discourse of ‘Occidental cosmopolitanism’. The article concludes with a critical discussion of the diverse and complex ideological foundations of these constructions of European cosmopolitanism and their implications.

What Constitutes 'Discrimination' in Everyday Talk? Argumentative Lines and the Social Representations of Discrimination

Most people agree that discrimination is wrong, but the boundary between ‘discrimination’ and ‘not discrimination’ is often highly contested in everyday practice. We explore the social representations of ‘discrimination’ as an object of study in qualitative interviews and focus groups with both minority (self-identified as BAME [Black, Asian, and minority ethnic] and/or gay men) and majority (self-identified as White and/or heterosexual) participants (n = 54). Our analysis suggests three repeated and pervasive argumentative lines in social representations of discrimination: (1) that there are two distinct kinds of discrimination (hard vs. soft), (2) that you need to understand the intention of the actor(s), and (3) that a claim of discrimination requires strong evidence. We outline the macro Functions of these resources to argue that each was non-performative: They appeared to be tools to make claims of discrimination, but in practice they were much more effective at making claims of what was not discrimination.