SOCIAL REPRESENTATION:
PHENOMENA, CONCEPT AND THEORY
Denise Jodelet (1986)
Summary:
INTRODUCTION
Social representation is a term that we now find in all the social sciences, long after Serge Moscovici (1961) took up this "forgotten
concept" of Durkheim. Not only does it designate multiple phenomena observed and studied at various levels of complexity, both
individual and collective, psychological, and social, but it also constitutes a new unit of approach, fruitful for social psychology and
promising for other social sciences.
For the last twenty years, a field of research has been established around this concept, with its specific objects and theoretical
framework. In science, often a concept first appears and defines what it is, such as the atom of matter or the hereditary gene.
Then, its structure and function are observed, which requires the development of a theory, even if it is rudimentary. This movement
can be observed in the field of social representation, where initial reflection tends towards theory.
Historically, a concept may be established in one science and its theory developed in another. The notion of a gene was born in
genetics, but its theory was elaborated in molecular biology. Similarly, the concept of social representation emerged in sociology,
where it had a long eclipse, but its theory was outlined in social psychology by Moscovici (1961, 1976), after a detour into child
psychology with Piaget (1926).
Starting from the notion of social representation, we will try to present the main lines of this theory, illustrating the variety of
phenomena with which it is related by means of some examples.
A. FROM REPRESENTATIVE PHENOMENA TO THE NOTION OF SOCIAL REPRESENTATION
In an experimental situation (J. C. Abric, 1971), several groups of subjects must carry out two types of tasks, each requiring a
different communication structure: the problem-solving task requires a hierarchical structure, while the creativity task needs a
non-hierarchical structure. In this experience, the simple fact that the experimenter defines the task in a way that is congruent or
not with its nature (e.g., suggesting that the task is about solving a problem when in fact it is a test of creativity, and vice versa) is
enough to affect the performance of the groups and to involve different cognitive procedures and forms of communication.
Subjects interpret and understand the situation differently and do not behave similarly when faced with an identical procedure.
Their performance is higher when their representation is consistent with the exercise they are required to perform and lower when
it is not. Subjects are organized according to their representation: hierarchically when the creativity task is perceived as problem
solving, and non-hierarchically when the problem-solving task is perceived as creativity task. Faced with a creativity task presented
as problem solving, they use cognitive processes adapted to this type of test, showing greater control of production, but with less
richness and originality.
A group's representation of what it should do defines specific goals and procedures for its members. Here we discover a first form
of social representation: the elaboration by a collectivity, under social induction, of a conception of the task that does not consider
the reality of its functional structure. This representation has a direct impact on social behavior and the organization of the group,
modifying cognitive functioning.
THE NOTION OF SOCIAL REPRESENTATION
Social representations manifest themselves in various forms, ranging from images that condense meanings to reference systems
that allow us to interpret what is happening around us. They also include categories that help us classify circumstances,
phenomena, and people, as well as theories that allow us to establish facts about them. When considered within the concrete
reality of our social life, social representations often encompass all of these aspects at once.
Looking at examples from the laboratory to social or historical contexts, and from data collected through coded procedures to the
analysis of institutional or spontaneous discourses, it is always a way of interpreting and thinking about our everyday reality, a form
of social knowledge. This knowledge is the result of the mental activity of individuals and groups to position themselves in relation
to situations, events, objects, and communications that affect them. The social influences through the concrete context,
communication, cultural baggage and codes, values and ideologies related to specific social positions and belongings.
1
Made by MatyBuda
, The notion of social representation is situated at the point where the psychological and the social intersect. It refers to how we, as
social subjects, apprehend the events of daily life, the characteristics of our environment and the information that circulates in it.
This "spontaneous" or "naïve" knowledge, which contrasts with scientific knowledge, is constituted from our experiences,
information, knowledge, and models of thought that we receive and transmit through tradition, education, and social
communication. It is a socially elaborated and shared knowledge, which attempts to dominate our environment, to understand
and explain the facts and ideas of our universe of life, and to act with and on other people.
This practical knowledge, by giving meaning to the events and acts that are habitual to us, participates in the social construction
of our reality. According to S. Moscovici, this knowledge constitutes the central axis of a psychology of knowledge, differing from
other social mental products such as science, myth, religion, and ideology by its modes of elaboration and functioning in societies
characterized by the pluralism of doctrines and ideas, the isolation of science and social mobility. However, their kinship does not
go extremely far with partial objects such as opinions, attitudes, stereotypes, and images that in social psychology are reduced to
simple response dispositions.
The concept of social representation designates a specific form of knowledge, common-sense knowledge, whose contents reflect
socially characterized generative and functional processes. In a broad sense, it designates a form of social thought, a modality of
practical thinking oriented towards communication, understanding and mastery of the social, material, and ideal environment. It
has specific characteristics in terms of content organization, mental operations, and logic. The social characterization of the
contents or processes of representation refers to the conditions and contexts in which they arise, the communications through
which they circulate, and the functions they fulfill in interaction with the world and others.
With this definition in mind, we can approach the way in which these objects thus defined will be approached.
B. ELEMENTS TO DELIMIT THE NOTION OF SOCIAL REPRESENTATION
From the examples we have given, we can conclude two essential points. First, social representation is defined by its content,
which can include information, images, opinions, and attitudes, and is always related to a specific object, such as a job, an economic
event, or a social figure. Second, social representation is always of a subject (individual, family, group, class) in relation to another
subject, and is influenced by the position that subjects occupy in society, economy, and culture.
It is essential to remember that all social representation is a representation of something and someone. It is not a duplicate of the
real or the ideal, nor a subjective part of the object or an objective part of the subject. It is the process by which the relationship
between them is established.
OF THE FACT OF REPRESENTATION ...
The act of representing is fundamental to understanding social representation. Representing is an act of thought in which a subject
relates to an object. This act has two key aspects: substituting something in our mind and making something absent present in our
consciousness. In this sense, representation is as much the symbol or sign of something as the mental reproduction of something
else.
Using theatrical and political metaphors, we can better understand social representation. In the theatre, actors make the invisible
present, such as fate or love. In politics, representatives act on behalf of others, acquiring autonomy and creative power. Similarly,
mental, and social representation not only symbolizes something absent, but can also substitute for the present and carries a part
of interpretation and creation.
Therefore, social representation is not a simple reproduction, but a construction with a meaningful, creative, and autonomous
character.
In analyzing the act of representing, we identified five key characteristics of social representation:
1. It always represents an object: Every social representation is linked to something specific, whether it is a figure, an event, or an
idea.
2. It has the character of an image: representation combines the sensible with the idea, the perception with the concept.
3. It has a symbolic and significant character: every figure in a representation corresponds to a meaning and vice versa.
4. It is constructive: representation is not a passive reflection of the external world but involves an activity of construction and
reconstruction of the subject.
2
Made by MatyBuda
