Editorial - (2022) Volume 15, Issue 94

A Brief Note on Socialization
James Franklin*
Department of social sciences, University of sciences, Ethiopia
*Correspondence: James Franklin, Department of social sciences, University of sciences, Ethiopia, Email:

Received: Nov 05, 2022, Manuscript No. jisr-22-82737; Editor assigned: Nov 07, 2022, Pre QC No. jisr-22-82737 (PQ); Reviewed: Nov 21, 2022, QC No. jisr-22-82737; Revised: Nov 23, 2022, Manuscript No. jisr-22-82737 (R); Published: Nov 30, 2022, DOI: 10.17719/jisr.2022. 82737


Socialization (see spelling variations) is the process of internalizing social norms and ideologies in sociology. Socialization envelops both learning and educating and is hence "the means by which social and social coherence are accomplished. Socialization is essentially the entire process of learning throughout a person's life and a major factor in adult and child behavior, beliefs, and actions. The society in which socialization occurs may experience desirable outcomes, which are sometimes referred to as "moral." The consensus of the society has an effect on individual views, which typically lean toward what the society considers acceptable or "normal." Maintaining that agents are not blank slates predetermined by their environment, socialization provides only a partial explanation for human beliefs and behaviors; there is evidence from scientific research that people are shaped by both genes and social influences. The first stage is known as the pre-conventional stage, during which a person, typically a child, views the world in terms of pain and pleasure and bases all of their moral choices solely on this perception. Second, acceptance of social norms regarding right and wrong, even when there are no consequences for disobedience or obedience, is a characteristic of the conventional stage, which is typical for adults and adolescents. At long last, the post-traditional stage (all the more seldom accomplished) happens on the off chance that an individual maneuvers past society's standards to consider unique moral standards while settling on moral choices.


Socialization, Environment


Infancy is the first stage of the life course, when babies learn to trust and distrust one another. The second stage is toddlerhood, during which young children around the age of two struggle with the conflict between independence and doubt. Preschoolers in stage three have difficulty distinguishing between initiative and guilt. Children learn about industriousness and inferiority in Stage 4, which is prior to adolescence. Teenagers face the challenge of establishing their identity in the face of confusion during the fifth stage known as adolescence. Young adulthood, the sixth stage, is when young people learn how to deal with the difficulties of intimacy and isolation. People face the challenge of trying to make a difference - as opposed to self-absorption—in stage seven, or middle adulthood. People are still learning about the challenge of integrity and despair in the final stage, stage eight, or old age. Klaus Hurrelmann and Gudrun Quenzel further developed this concept by utilizing the dynamic model of "developmental tasks.


A theory known as social behaviorism was developed by George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) to explain how an individual's self-concept is formed by their interactions with others. The self is Mead's central concept: Self-image and self-awareness are its components. Mead asserted that the self develops through social experience rather than being present at birth. People typically seek meaning in every action because social experience is based on the exchange of symbols. We begin to imagine other people's intentions when we look for meaning. To comprehend intention, one must imagine the situation from the other person's perspective. We can, in effect, see ourselves in other people. The term "looking glass self" was created by Charles Horton Cooley (1902–83), and it refers to our self-image based on how we perceive others. Learning to play the other person's role is essential to self-development, according to Mead. Infants can only develop a sense of identity through imitation because they have limited social experience. Children gradually acquire the ability to assume multiple roles. The final stage is known as the generalized other, and it refers to common cultural norms and values that we use to evaluate other people.

Behaviorism asserts that infants lack social experience or self-awareness at birth. On the other hand, a scientific study supports the social pre-wiring hypothesis, which states that social behavior is partly inherited and can affect infants and even fetuses. Wired to be social implies that babies are not instructed that they are social creatures, but rather they are brought into the world as pre-arranged social creatures.

The ontogeny of social interaction is the subject of the social pre-wiring hypothesis. Also known as "wired to be social" informally. The theory asks if there is an ability to act in a socially responsible way from birth. According to the theory, newborns are born with a unique genetic wiring to be social. Examining newborns' behavior reveals circumstantial evidence in support of the social pre-wiring hypothesis. It has been discovered that newborns are ready for social interaction even shortly after birth. They show this preparedness by imitating facial expressions, for instance. It is impossible to attribute the observed behavior to any current socialization or social construction process. Instead, newborns most likely inherit social behavior and identity to some extent through genetics[24]. The primary evidence for this theory comes from twin pregnancies. The main argument is that twin foetuses should be expected to engage in some kind of social interaction before they are born if there are social behaviors that are inherited and developed before birth. As a result, ultrasound techniques were used to examine ten foetuses over time. Utilizing kinematic investigation, the consequences of the trial were that the twin babies would interface with one another for longer periods and all the more frequently as the pregnancies went on. The social pre-wiring hypothesis was proven to be correct: "The central advance of this study is the demonstration that'social actions' are already performed in the second trimester of gestation," according to the researchers. They were able to come to the conclusion that the co-twins' ability to move was not just a fluke but was specifically aimed. From the 14th week of pregnancy on, twin foetuses plan and carry out actions that target the other twin. Because of these findings, we have to go back to before social behavior started: Other-directed actions are not only possible but also more prevalent than self-directed actions when the context permits it, as in the case of twin foetuses.


According to the theory of group socialization, an individual's peer groups, not their parents, have the most impact on their personality and behavior as adults. Parental behavior and the home environment either have no effect on a child's social development at all or have a significant impact on different children.[33] Adolescents spend more time with peers than with parents. As a result, there is a stronger correlation between peer groups and personality development than there is between parental figures. For instance, even though twin brothers have identical genetic makeup, their personalities will differ because they have different groups of friends, not necessarily because their parents raised them differently. The environment in which a child is raised accounts for only about ten percent of the variance of an adult's personality. As much as twenty percent of the variance is due to measurement error. This suggests that only a very small portion of an adult's personality is influenced by factors parents control (i.e. the home environment). Behavioral genetics suggests that up to fifty percent of the variance in adult personality is due to genetic differences. The environment in which a child is raised accounts for According to Harris, although it is true that siblings do not have the same experiences in the home environment, which makes it difficult to assign a precise figure to the variance of personality due to home environments, the variance found by current methods is so low that researchers should look elsewhere to try to account for the remaining variance. Additionally, Harris asserts that it would be evolutionary advantageous to develop long-term personality characteristics away from the home environment because future success is more likely to depend on interactions with peers than it is on interactions with parents and siblings. Additionally, developing personalities outside of childhood homes would further diversify individuals and boost their evolutionary success because of the already existing genetic similarities between parents.


  1. Myers SC. (1984). The capital structure puzzle. Journal of Finance, Vol.39, no.1, pp.575-592.
  2. Okka O. (2015). Finansal Yönetim: Teori ve Çözümlü Problemler. 6. Bs., Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
  3. Pinto G,  Rastogi S. (2019). Sectoral analysis of factors influencing dividend policy: Case of an emerging financial market. Journal of risk and financial management, Vol.12, no.3, pp.1-18.
  4. Mueller DC. (1972). A life cycle theory of the firm. The Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol.20, no.3, pp.199-219.
  5. Google Scholar   

  6. Renneboog L,  Trojanowski G. (2007). Control structures and payout policy. Managerial Finance, Vol.33, no.1, pp.43–64.
  7. Litzenberger RH,  Ramaswamy K. (1979). The effect of personal taxes and dividends on capital asset prices: Theory and empirical evidence. Journal of financial economics. Vol.7, no.2, pp.163-195.
  8. Google Scholar 

  9. Rogers W. (1993). Regression Standard Errors in Clustered Samples. Stata Technical Bulletin, Vol.3, pp.19-23.
  10. Sayılgan G. (2017). Soru ve Yanıtlarıyla İşletme Finansmanı.7. Bs., Ankara: Siyasal Kitapevi. Ekonomik Ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Vol.10, no.1, pp.185-206.
  11. Manos R, Yaron J. (2008). Measuring the performance of microfinance providers: an assessment of past and present practices. International Journal of Financial Services Management, Vol.3, no.2, pp.171-187.
  12. Miller MH, Modigliani F. (1961). Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of shares. The Journal of Business, Vol.34, no.4, pp.411-433.
  13. Myers SC,  Majluf NS. (1984). Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of financial economics, Vol.13, no.2, pp.187-221.
  14. Google Scholar, Crossref


You can send your paper at

  • The Journal of International Social Research / Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi ISSN: 1307-9581, an international, peer-reviewed, on the web publication, from 2007 will be issued least four times annualy.
  • Our journal is an independent academic publication based on research in social sciences, contributing to its field and trying to publish scientific articles that will bring innovation to the original and social sciences.
  • The journal has got an international editorial board and referee board, mainly embodied from the each individually professional on the social research fields.
  • Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi / The Journal of International Social Research became a member of Cross Reff since 2014 and started to assign DOI numbers to the articles. image
Google Scholar citation report
Citations : 27

The Journal of International Social Research received 27 citations as per Google Scholar report

The Journal of International Social Research peer review process verified by publons
Get the App