An attempt to explain what is meant by the term ‘social construction’ relation to further our understanding of the concept of identity.

Social construction is a theory about how we understand the world, that our understanding is not just ‘natural’, but constructed between people in their everyday interactions, and it is one of several theories that try to explain human behaviour.
I first will first briefly explain the constructionist approach in general by focusing on the two terms ‘social’ and ‘construction’. Through examples, which illustrate important arguments of the theory, especially language, and by highlighting differences to other theories and emphasizing the holistic approach of social constructionism towards people’s identities, I will show how social constructionism has been used to further our understanding of the concept of identity and conclude by emphasizing the importance of this theory in contemporary debate.

Social constructionism is a relatively new tradition, focusing on the study of language and culture within psychology. It is an important perspective in contemporary psychology. The term ‘social construction’ consists of two parts. The way we understand the world around us does not come ‘natural’, it is constructed as the example of housework by Ann Phoenix (Ann Phoenix in Miell, D, Phoenix, A., Thomas, K., 2002) shows. This attitude about homework existed because it reflected, how it was usually handled for as long as we can remember but as the example further demonstrates, a view can be altered and differently constructed by e.g. feminists, arguing for equality with men. The other part, ‘social’, is a reference to how this construction takes place namely through social relations, interactions with other people and treatment of particular groups of people by our society.
In contrast to the psychosocial theory of identity developed by Erikson (Erikson, 1968), where the achievement of a core identity is the central task of adolescence hence, rather fixed from this point on, social constructionists view identity as multiple, de-centred, provisional, dynamic and historically and culturally specific, shifting over time and from context to context. The many ways, individuals can look at the same thing or understand the same issue, that our identities are socially constructed, is the perspective of social constructionism.
The example of Nelson Mandela, who was for some people a terrorist and for others a freedom fighter illustrates that perspective rather well. It also shows that language is fundamental to the process of social construction, simply because we think, talk and generally communicate through it. In the above mentioned example it shows that trough the power of the language, the white apartheid regime had eventually to abandon its terrorist construction of Mandela due to the ever growing support for the other view, portraying him as a freedom fighter, displaying the power relations constructed through language in our society. In other words, by talking or writing we actively construct ways of understanding things and actively construct our identities. This perspective of social constructionism helps us understand the concept of identity.
As society changes over time, our relationships and identities change, influenced by our histories, social position, experience and social and technical change in general. A good illustration would be the example of US psychologist Kenneth Gergen (Gergen, 1999) who showed that by being aware of gaining an advantage in doing certain things, behaviour like writing exclusively with a pen can become an identity and through technological change, this identity will have to be newly constructed and changes. It also illustrates the argument of the theory, that our social histories and positions influence the availability of identities to individuals. The way, how the individual in Gergen’s example choose to tell his story, constructs his identity again confirming the claim of social constructionists, that language is central to the construction of our identities. However, it is difficult to prove that we construct autobiographical narratives and some would see this as a shortcoming of social constructionist theories of identity. The majority of people also tend to think of rather one core identity then multiple, de-centred identities and remember their identity stable for as long as they can think. Social constructionist would argue that in order to fulfil the need of some degree of continuity in our identities, we reconstruct the past in ways helping us understand the past, present and our expectations of the future.
As shown by the above illustrated examples, social constructionism focuses on how identities are constructed in everyday life through a network of social relations and language, affected by the discourses available within society, furthering our understanding of the concept of identity.
Another way of considering the contribution of social constructionism to our understanding of identity is by thinking about the methods used. While social identity theory uses an outsider viewpoint to look at psychological processes within groups in order to understand people’s identities, social constructionism and other theories use insider accounts. People’s accounts of their experiences of their own identities. Analysis of everyday discourses, the process by which people construct meanings through ways of thinking and talking about current issues of our culture, is another method of producing data and giving insight on the concept of identity by e.g. disclosing that identities are constructed differently in different cultures.

Psychologists have different perspectives on psychological issues e.g. identity and use different methods and data for their theories. It is important to understand, that no one answer, or theory, can provide the answer or the ‘truth’. Theories provide different views on issues, different ways of thinking and by that inspiring new questions and theories.
By putting emphasis on multiplicity and fluidity, social constructionists explain changes in our embodied identities. Their argument that identities are actively constructed and negotiated e.g. as understanding of disability changes, allows for changes to identity throughout life and by doing so, linking the theory of social constructionism to contemporary society with its rapid changes and constant movement, furthering our understanding of the concept of identity and its complex interactive and multiple dimensions. The example of Nelson Mandela, constructed on one side as a terrorist and on the other side as a freedom fighter showed impressively the importance of language and the power dimension. It reveals how identities are constructed in language and how they are affected by the discourse available within society by linking it to ‘real’ events of our everyday life, furthering our understanding of the complex concept of identity.
(1059 words)

References
Erikson, E. (1968) Identity, Youth and Crisis, New York, W.W. Norton & Co.

Gergen, K. (1999) An Invitation to Social Construction, London, Sage in Miell, D, Phoenix, A., Thomas, K., (eds), (2002), Mapping Psychology 1, Milton Keynes, Open University.

Phoenix, A. (2002) Identities and diversities, in Miell, D, Phoenix, A., Thomas, K., (eds), (2002), Mapping Psychology 1, Milton Keynes, Open University.