Social constructionism, or socio-constructionism, is a theoretical perspective that emerged in the mid-twentieth century as a result of the epistemological and methodological crisis that the social sciences went through.
He considers that language is not a simple reflection of reality, but that it is the producer of it, with which he passes from the idea of representation that dominated science to that of discursive action.
The latter allows us to question the set of “truths” through which we relate to the world, in addition to creating new theories and methods of knowledge.
In addition to being considered as a theoretical perspective, socio-constructionism is defined as a theoretical movement in which different works and proposals are grouped . Next, we will examine some antecedents and definitions of social constructionism, as well as the repercussions it had on social psychology.
Social constructionism: a theoretical-practical alternative
Since the 1960s, and in the context of the crisis of modern thought, the epistemological foundations of the social sciences have undergone some important changes.
Among other things, these changes emerge as a criticism of the representation model of science, where language is understood as an instrument that faithfully reflects the mental content, by which the same mind contains exact representations of the external world (of “reality”). .
In the same context, there is a critique of the absolute truths and research methods through which these truths were believed to be accessed. Thus, the application of the positivist methodology in the social sciences and the omission of the socio-historical processes that frame them are questioned.
In other words, given the tendency of traditional scientific thought to present itself as an absolute reflection of the reality it studied; social constructionism says that reality does not exist independently of our actions, but that we produce it through language (understood as a practice).
Reactions to traditional science
One of the approaches that have marked the social sciences and for which socio-constructionism places an important distance is the disqualification of methodologies that are not hypothetical-deductive and positivist. From there, social constructionism questions the predominance of the experimental model , where it is assumed that knowledge is acquired based on the control that an “external” experimenter exerts over the situation studied, which, in turn, implies the existence of variables They are stable and controllable.
In the same way, a reaction is established before the apparent timelessness that characterized the traditional way of doing science. This is because this timelessness has resulted in historical facts being understood as anecdotal and therefore unscientific.
Finally, he questioned the alleged truths about human beings, which were taken for granted by implementing the methodologies used in the natural sciences.
A psychosociological project and its repercussions on psychology
In relation to what we explained above, authors such as Sandoval (2010) consider that socio-constructionism is not exactly a theory, but “a meta-theoretical attempt to construct an alternative to the hegemony of empiricism in epistemology; of behaviorism and cognitivism in theory and experimentalism in methodology; the trilogy that underlies the core of intelligibility of modern psychology” (p. 32).
In short, four principles that define socio-constructionism and that impact modern psychology are:
1. Anti-essentialism: the primacy of social processes and discursive practices
The practices that make up a reality are maintained thanks to the establishment of a social order , which occurs through human activity, without any ontological status. From getting used to these practices, the same human activity is institutionalized and shapes a society. For this reason, everyday life discarded by traditional social sciences becomes especially important for socio-constructionism.
At the methodological level, socio-constructionism considers the unpredictability of human behavior and social reality as something constructed in everyday life and a reciprocity between society-person, with which psychology must locate the cases it studies or attends in certain social contexts. . In the same sense, people are the product of specific social processes .
Likewise, the socio-constructionist current allowed us to question the use of the hypothetical-deductive method in the social sciences, initially systematized by the natural sciences; and that he had moved on as a model for psychology.
2. Relativism: the historical and cultural specificity of knowledge
This theory argues that the knowledge obtained by the social sciences is fundamentally historical and, as it is highly variable, it cannot resort to the methods of study of the natural sciences.
Likewise, the socio-constructionist current allowed us to question the use of the hypothetical-deductive method in the social sciences, initially systematized by the natural sciences ; and that he had moved on as a model for psychology.
In the same sense, what we know as “reality” does not exist separately from the knowledge or descriptions we produce about it.
3. Knowledge and action as two phenomena that go together
Social constructionism aims to explain how knowledge and social reality are constructed from the activity (discursive capacity) of subjects. Highlight the reflective quality of the researcher. That is, it underlines the constructive power of language in the context of social relations.
From there, socio-constructionism intends to develop alternative perspectives to the individual approach to knowledge (that is, to the idea that everything that is known is known individually), allowing the analysis of the importance of shared knowledge in the production of knowledge. a particular reality
Social constructionism is a perspective that continually questions the truths we take for granted , doubting how we learn to look at ourselves and the world.
4. A critical stance, that is, attentive to the effects of language in terms of power
The consideration that there is no neutrality in the production of knowledge, which makes the active role of people recognized as a builder of their own reality, including the researcher himself, and the psychologist is a facilitator of social change .
Think of the human being outside the qualities that should be universally shared thanks to the “common man paradigm”, but consider the social context in which explanations emerge and the places assigned to each.
Lead authors and background
Although social constructionism is a heterogeneous perspective that different authors can fit in and out of, Kenneth Gergen is considered one of the greatest exponents , especially in his article Social psychology as history, published in 1973.
As part of this reformulation of the social sciences, Berger and Luckmann had already published the book The Social Construction of Reality in 1968, a work that had an important influence on Gergen’s work, which is why it is also considered fundamental for the development of socio-constructionism.
The latter authors propose that reality is “a quality of phenomena that we recognize as independent of our own will” and knowledge “the certainty that phenomena are real and have specific characteristics”. That is, they question the belief that reality is something that exists independently of our actions , with society being an external entity that shapes us and that we can know it absolutely.
Among the theoretical antecedents of social constructionism are poststructuralism, discourse analysis, the Frankfurt School, the sociology of knowledge and critical social psychology. In general, they are theories that reflect on the interdependence between knowledge and social reality.
In the same way, social constructionism has been related to authors such as Latour and Woolgar, Feyerabend, Kuhn, Laudan, Moscovici, Hermans.
Some criticisms of socio-constructionism
Among other things, socio-constructionism has been criticized for the tendency towards discursive radicalization of most of its theories .
In general, these criticisms say that social constructionism can be immobilizing, because if everything that exists is constructed by language, what is the place of the material and what are its possibilities of action in the meaning of the world. In the same sense, he has been criticized for an excessive relativism that can sometimes make it difficult to assume or defend demanding positions.
Finally, after several decades of this theoretical perspective emerging, constructionism had to adapt to new forms of social organization. For example, some proposals that were inspired by constructionism, but added important elements to current debates, are the Red Actor Theory, Performativity or some materialist and feminist positions.
