Maria Xenitidou

Three kinds of normative behaviour: minimal requirements for feedback models

We present an analysis for modelling social norms. In social psychology three different normative behaviours have been identified: obedience, conformity and compliance. We show that this triad is a useful conceptualisation of normative behaviour and that current models only ever deal with conformity and obedience two, neglecting compliance. We argue that this is a result from modelling having so far focussed too much on agent behaviour rather than agent knowledge and that cognitive models of normative behaviour are needed to capture this third and arguably most interesting normative behaviour.

Introduction to the Special Issue: The Processes of Methodological Innovation Narrative Accounts and Reflections

In recent years there has been an upsurge of interest in methodological innovation and innovative methodologies in the social sciences. Driven by a wider, global impetus for innovation, discussions have centred on the use, application, diffusion and success of new methods. In the social sciences in particular, this upsurge of interest has been attributed to a need to respond to the complexities of the social world that has encouraged methodological, disciplinary and institutional interaction and cross-fertilisation. However, these discussions usually overlook the processes involved in methodological innovation and ignore their role in shaping innovative methodologies. This special issue aims to trigger discussion on the processes of methodological innovation in the social science community and beyond.

The Conundrum of Social Norms

Consciously or otherwise people decide what to do bearing in mind what they think is acceptable/unacceptable to others around them. These standards of acceptability can be called social norms. Thus, the idea of social norms lies at the heart of sociology—how individual behaviour is constrained by (the individual’s view of) the expectations of others. There is often considerable agreement between participants as to when a social norm is violated, and people report that what they perceive as social norms impact upon them both in thought and action. Some are bold enough to call social norms “the grammar of society” (Bicchieri, 2005).

Qualitative Methodologies in the Study of Citizenship and Migration.

This special section brings together contributions on citizenship from social psychology. The six papers that make up the special section focus on different cases, but they all share the following in common: (a) a focus on studying citizenship and migration, albeit different aspects and in different contexts; (b) an approach to citizenship from the “ground,” focusing on the ways in which social actors understand, negotiate, and enact citizenship; (c) the use of qualitative research to study citizenship and migration; (d) and a social psychological perspective. Expanding on recent contributions on the study of citizenship in social psychology (Condor, 2011a; Stevenson, McNamara, & Muldoon, 2015), the contributions in this special section display a preoccupation with social actors’ own orientations toward citizenship in particular, using mainly discursive methods to analyze them.

Criteria of citizenship and social inclusion in immigrants' discourse in Greece.

Naturalization criteria play an important role in who can be accepted as a member of a national polity. In the political and social sciences often a distinction is drawn between the right of blood—jus sanguinis—and the right of soil—jus soli—as guiding principles for naturalization. This distinction corresponds to the 2 different types of nationalism and national belonging identified by Kohn (1945, 1955) namely ethnic nationalism and civic nationalism. In social psychology, this distinction has been used to examine which type of national belonging is more often associated to prejudice against immigrants and their exclusion. Recent approaches informed by social constructionism and discourse analysis examine how citizenship and the exclusion of immigrants are articulated in talk and what interactional goals seem to serve in each occasion. In this article, we examine how immigrants in Greece construct naturalization criteria in talk and how these may relate to the inclusion or exclusion of immigrants. Participants were 25 immigrants who participated in an interview on the current situation in Greece and the new naturalization law. Analyzing the interviews using rhetorical psychology, ideological dilemmas, and discursive psychology we argue that participants legitimized their own presence within Greece through the ridicule of citizenship criteria. At the same time, they seemed to exclude other immigrant groups using discourses of legality/illegality. A possible reason for this dilemma, we maintain, is the diverse ideological background of the notion of citizenship, which allows its mobilization toward different ends.

Using ABM to Clarify and Refine Social Practice Theory

We use an agent-based model to help to refine and clarify social practice theory, wherein the focus is neither on individuals nor on any form of societal totality, but on the repeated performances of practices ordered across space and time. The recursive relationship between social practices and practitioners (individuals performing practices) is strongly emphasised in social practice theory. We intend to have this recursive relationship unfold dynamically in a model where practitioners and social practices are both considered as agents. Model conceptualisation is based on the principle of structuration theory—the focus is neither on micro causing macro nor on macro influencing micro, but on the duality between structure (macro) and agency (micro). In our case, we conceptualise the duality between practitioners and practices based on theoretical insights from social practices literature; where information is unclear or insufficient, we make systematic assumptions and account for these.

Understanding Quality in Science: A Proposal and Exploration

Quality is a concept or characteristic that everyone knows, but yet is not well understood or defined. In many cases it is simply recognised as the absence of defects. Indeed when specific criteria are provided this is often in such as way as to enable personal preferences or prejudices to inform the decision. In this paper, we present an overview of the work that we are embarking upon examining quality in science. We propose three analysis approaches that integrate conceptual, functional, and perceptual levels, and combine both qualitative and quantitative techniques. In addition to providing small-scale case studies, we outline future work which is guided by an understanding of quality as a collective process.