Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Philosophical Thought
Reference:

Social norms in society as an integral factor in the formation and evaluation of an individual's reputation

Kryukova Yuliya Evgen'evna

Tutor, Department of Philosophy of Language and Communication, Lomonosov Moscow State University

119121, Russia, Moscow, ul. 1-Truzhenikov lane, 17A, sq. 20

Juletta87@list.ru

DOI:

10.25136/2409-8728.2022.7.26606

EDN:

GCWLAA

Received:

15-06-2018


Published:

05-08-2022


Abstract: One of the problems in the study of reputation, which faces specialists in different fields, is the search for factors of formation and criteria for evaluating the value characteristics of subjects, both individualized and collective. For example, experts in the field of game theory are of the opinion that there are game-theoretic models of reputation and norms of activity, and reputation itself, in their research, is, in a sense, a reflection on the norm of activity. In this article, the task is to consider social norms, firstly, as a factor in the formation of reputation, and secondly, as a factor in the assessment of the subject. During the period of education, there is an interiosis of social norms and the formation of value systems, which affects the activity of the subject. Based on the analysis of the subject's activities, one can judge the reputation. The very concept of "reputation" is polysemantic in nature. This allows us to talk about reputation, on the one hand, as a certain phenomenon, an established system of assessments and value characteristics, on the other, as a process of forming such assessments and characteristics. In the latter case, it turns out that "reputation" as a procedural concept turns to us in the form of a process of searching for the value characteristics of subjects and the results of their activities and the decision-making process on what assessment to give to the activity of the subject.The article will show that the compliance or non-compliance of the subject's activity with generally accepted social norms, as well as the value preferences of the evaluating subject, turns out to be one of the fundamental factors for making a decision regarding the reputation of the evaluated subject, both individualized and collective.


Keywords:

reputation, social norms, values, norms of activity, decision making, estimation, social philosophy, activity, motivation, standard

This article is automatically translated.

Reputation is a polysemantic concept that determines a wide range of its application and consideration. Because of this, the concept of "reputation" is given different characteristics by specialists in the field of economics, psychology, sociology, political science, and other fields. Of particular interest to specialists of various sciences in the study of the phenomenon of reputation are issues related to the process of reputation formation, in general, individual factors of formation, in particular, as well as criteria for assessing the reputation of the subject. The article will present arguments in defense of the fact that from a socio-philosophical point of view, the formation and evaluation of an individual's reputation is directly dependent on both the social norms existing in a particular society and the value orientations of individual subjects who decide to evaluate a particular reputation.

Based on previous studies [see 6, 7], we will rely on the following characteristic of the concept of "reputation": "Reputation is a concept that represents both the result and the process of forming an opinion, the process of making a decision about the assessment given to the subject or object of assessment, based on its advantages and/or disadvantages, identified during the analysis of the activity of this subject" [7].

We will distinguish the concept of "activity" from the above description of the concept of "reputation", since on the basis of the activity of the subject, the evaluating subject decides whether the reputation of the assessed subject is positive or negative.

The concept of "activity" is studied by psychologists, sociologists, philosophers and other specialists. For example, K. H. Momjian believes that any of the categories of humanities and social studies fixes either subjective, or objective, or organizational, or culturological or taxonomic characteristics of activity, revealing all the diversity of its types and types ("who acts?", "what uses and what creates?", "in what connections and the relationship enters?", "how does it act?", "where does it act?") [8, p.5].

               It is possible to reveal the mechanism and features of reputation formation by the example of forming an assessment of a politician's activity. In particular, we can say that the activities of the politician are regulated by national norms and at the same time by norms corresponding to the political goals and objectives of the organization. Thus, the activity of a deputy who is a member of the Federal Assembly, for example, in the State Duma, is regulated, in addition to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, by the norms presented in the regulations of the State Duma and in the ethical codes [11].

              There is no doubt that the reputation of a politician is greatly influenced by the public side of his activities. At the same time, the private life of a politician is also important, that is, his family, leisure, personal environment. In each of these cases, the main focus is on the problem of both private and public activities [see details 20].

When assessing the activity of a subject, the cornerstone is the question — why does an individual decide to act this way and not in another way, what is his motivation?

Motivation is a complex psychological process based on many factors, including need, need, interest.

K. H. Momjian defines the levels of motivation that prevail in the human psyche.

"There are three such levels:

1) the level of emotional motivation, when the criteria of “best” and “worst” are “pleasant” and “unpleasant” for a person;

2) the level of rational motivation, where the criterion of the “best” for a person is useful for him and “feasible" by him;

3) the level of motives of duty, where the criterion of "the best" is the ideas of "decent", "decent", etc. sanctioned by cultural norms" [8, p.7]

 Our research will be directed to the third level of motivation — obligation, where by "sanctioned cultural norms of the idea of "decent", "decent"" we will understand the social norms existing in society.

The concept of "social norm" is polysemantic. According to A. P. Solkina, "a social norm is a set of permissions or prohibitions in the general system of life affirmation and self-development of society." She notes that the content of the concept of "social norm" focuses on the creative qualities of the human world with its specific human culture, reflecting the eternal choice of a person between what is due and what is desired, that is, the search for a single right solution [17, p.13].

Social norms impose an essential role on the behavior of an individual. This point of view is supported by researcher V. V. Momov: "A person performs his daily activities in various social institutions, he faces various complex and unique situations. The norm gives him the right orientation, organizes, generates and regulates his behavior in the interests of the collective, obliges him to obey the requirements of the collective, protecting him from certain individualistic hobbies" [9, p.9].

There are many criteria and grounds for typologizing social norms. Let's highlight some of them.

According to the method of fixation, social norms are divided into oral and written, formal and informal, expressed explicitly or with a "subtext". Technical, economic, political, legal, religious, moral, aesthetic, cultural social norms are distinguished according to the spheres of public life, the reflection of which they are.  Social norms are also divided into universal and private ones [17, pp. 66-68].

All of the above types of norms are formed on the basis of ideologies accepted by society, which in turn influence all spheres of public relations and public consciousness, and all systems of social norms [17, p. 67].

Of the above, consider explicit formal and explicit informal norms, as well as frequent and universal social norms. Professional and ethical industry codes in the field of "public relations" can be attributed to written informal, that is, norms that are rather advisory in nature. There are a number of ethical codes in this industry. For example, the professional charter of the International Committee of the Association of PR Consultants ICO, adopted in Rome (the Rome Charter); the Helsinki Charter, signed at the World PR Congress in Helsinki by such associations as IPRA, CERP and ICO; the Athens Code; the Lisbon Code; the IPRA Code of Professional Conduct and others [5]. Most codes pay attention to the definition of the principles and norms of professional activity and moral behavior of a public relations specialist, his duties towards clients and employers, colleagues, his profession and the media.

It is worth noting that such norms as compliance with the principles of accuracy and integrity in the transmission of information, the exclusion of knowingly false and misleading information, harm to honor, dignity and reputation, prescribed in most public relations codes, are regulated not only secretly within PR associations, but also at the legislative level, that is, at the level of formal explicit norms, as will be discussed below.

We will refer to explicit formal norms as written and binding norms. They are prescribed in various regulatory documents, instructions, standards. For example, the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Agro-industrial Complex, the Civil Code and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, specific legislative acts, contracts, standards.

In particular, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes responsibility for crimes related to encroachment on the honor and dignity of the individual — slander (Article 129 of the Criminal Code), insult (Article 130 of the Criminal Code) [17]. Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which a citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of information discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation, if the person who disseminated such information does not prove that they correspond to reality, belongs to civil legal means of protecting honor and dignity.  Also, in paragraph 5 of Article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, "A citizen in respect of whom information discrediting his honor, dignity and business reputation is distributed has the right, along with the refutation of such information, to demand compensation for losses and moral damage caused by their dissemination" [2].

 If the subject's activity complies with explicit and formal norms, the evaluating subject makes an instructive decision regarding a positive reputation and, conversely, in case of non-compliance with generally accepted norms, the subject may not only have a negatively colored reputation and be punished in the form of a fine, dismissal, reprimand, and more.  "Instructional decisions are decisions that are built on the basis of a specific set of rules fixed in documents defining the procedure for actions leading to a certain result" [18, p.176].

Let's take a closer look at the division of social norms into universal and private. "Universal or general social norms are distinguished depending on the globality, the breadth of coverage of society, in other words, they are inherent in all individuals. Private norms, as a reflection of multilateral human activity, can characterize a certain type of activity (scientific activity, business, creativity); specific professions (teacher, engineer, educator, clergyman); social role function (president, official, deputy, citizen)" [17, p. 66].

Private social norms reflecting a certain direction of an individual's activity can be correlated with a "professional" reputation, that is, with the reputation of an individual in terms of his professional activity. Thus, some authors distinguish literary [14], academic [16] and political [20] reputation. The list can be continued. The main criterion contributing to the formation of this kind of reputation is compliance with the norms adopted in a certain community or among the parties interested in the activity of the subject (stakeholders [15]).

For example, in order to have a positive academic reputation, the activity of the subject must meet certain criteria imposed in the scientific and pedagogical sphere [16]. The object of evaluation can be either an individual, represented by a researcher, teacher, student, or a social institution represented by an educational institution or a scientific publication. In modern philosophy, the problem of scientometry is discussed, where the criterion "number of publications" is taken as the basis for assessing the state of the effectiveness of a researcher, teacher, in particular in rating journals from foreign publications Scopus and Web of Science [10]. Thus, one of the conditions for the formation of a positive academic reputation will be the fulfillment of indicators (both quantitative and qualitative) that correspond to social norms adopted in the scientific and pedagogical sphere. 

             It should be noted that teachers and representatives of the scientific sphere act as stakeholders in the formation of academic reputation. In order to form a positive business reputation, the activity of an entity must comply, on the one hand, with the norms regulating this sphere of activity, on the other – with the expectations and ideas of other stakeholders (the state, society, the media, shareholders, investors, the business community and others). For example, it is important for the state that a business entity follows the law and fulfills tax obligations; for society, it shows social responsibility; for the media, it is open and accessible. Graham Dowling divides all stakeholders into four groups: normative, functional, diffuse and consumer [3, p. 35]. It is important to understand that in the mechanisms of reputation formation, compliance or non-compliance with the expectations of stakeholders turns out to be an important tool of the reputation formation process itself.

           Thus, an individual, as a unique set of characteristics, accepted social norms and value orientations, is evaluated by various stakeholders, individuals focused on certain norms and values. Due to the large number of evaluation tools, it will be legitimate for stakeholders to talk about the complexity and heterogeneity of the process of forming the reputation of the subject of activity.

           The heterogeneity of reputation can also be explained by the fact that adherence to social norms and compliance with the ideals of society is the result of a complex psychological process of development of consciousness, moral beliefs and value systems of personality, social behavior skills, the result of the restructuring of the motivational system, the system of internal regulators of behavior [1].

           It is important to emphasize that the evaluation of one subject by another subject, in a certain sense, the formation of the reputation of the subject being evaluated, is primarily a rational, thought process, as evidenced by the etymological analysis of the word reputation [see more details 7].  In this regard, it is important to distinguish between such concepts as the concept of "reputation" and "image". One of the criteria for assessing the image is precisely the emotional, not the rational component of the subject's characteristics.

         Thus, consciously or unconsciously, each individual correlates the social norms existing in society with his value system and manifests his activities and behavior in one way or another, thereby forming his reputation in the eyes of certain stakeholders. Individuals, in turn, evaluating the activity of the subject, correlate the activity of the subject with social norms that are comparable to their value system. Because of this, it turns out that during the definition of the concept of "reputation" it is important to take into account its procedural characteristics.

E. Durheim believes that a society can exist only when there is a sufficient degree of homogeneity between its members. Education reproduces and strengthens this homogeneity, initially laying in the child the main similarities that collective existence requires. Education, as a social institution, promotes familiarization with social norms, ensures the preservation of this necessary diversity, while it differentiates itself and specializes [4].

In the context of our research, the fact that the current regulatory regulation concerns public consciousness, which contains a system of values of society, is fundamental. And any norm in society is a kind of criterion for evaluating the future forms of an individual's behavior and forming a judgment about his values.

Based on the above, we come to the conclusion that the social norms existing in society affect the activity of the subject, are a regulator of proper behavior and an indicator for making a decision on evaluating the activity of the subject and the formation of his reputation. Professional, religious, legislative or other norms perceived during the interiosis of the subject, lay down a system of values and form the ideological picture of the subject. An individual's value system based on perceived social norms helps the evaluating subject in the process of making a decision about the evaluation of another subject and making a judgment about a positive or negative reputation.

 

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.