Norms
The gene, atom, and molecule of sociology
[reader’s note: below is an excerpt from a text I am currently working on, tentatively titled: The space between: Why there is so much incorrect, immoral, or just plain odd behavior online. The book is oriented towards general non-fiction readers and undergraduate sociology majors. This passage discusses norms.]
Biologists have their genes. Physicists have their atoms. Chemists trade in molecules. Geologists have…rocks? In each of the basic scientific disciplines—one of the “-ologies,” as it were—there are core “things” that are collected, studied, and counted. In sociology, that thing is the norm.
Lisa Wade, in her sociology textbook Terrible Magnificent Sociology (2022), defines norms as “shared expectations of behavior” (p. 43). This definition works well. Other definitions might use terms like “unwritten rules,” “standards of behavior,” or “expectations of conduct.” All these definitions converge on the idea that norms represent what a group of people agree should occur in a given situation.
What norms are not
Here is what norms do not refer to for me in this text. It is not about the most popular behavior or activity. Playing Wordle in the 2020s. Doing a Fortnite dance in the 2010s. Starting a Myspace page in the 2000s. It is possible that each of these, let’s call them fads, may have been a popular activity within a given demographic during their brief periods of prominence. I, like many others, had a Myspace page in the early 2000s. During the Covid-19 pandemic, my online friends frequently posted their solved Wordles.
Fads and trends are fascinating phenomena. They raise questions like: Why do some activities become fads? What values or beliefs do these fads reflect? However, I consider these statistical norms—what is most frequently observed. You count the occurrences, and the most common activity is labeled the “norm.”
Similarly, norms, as I am using the term here, are not about what is normal. When something is described as normal, it is not necessarily the most popular but rather typical. I distinguish between popular and typical: popular refers to what is observed most often, while typical refers to behavior that is commonly observed, even if not the most frequent. For example, Google Chrome has been the most popular browser over the last decade, making its use a societal norm. Browsers like Edge, Safari, and Firefox are less popular but still typical.
We see the distinction between popular and typical with the use of the term “normalize.” To normalize something is to make it commonplace. Supporters of trans rights may aim to normalize the presence of trans individuals in society. Educators may wish to normalize stress during exam week, encouraging students to see it as typical. In both cases, normalization involves making the atypical become typical. For instance, normalizing the presence of trans individuals can reduce societal stigma. Similarly, understanding that stress during exams is common might encourage students to seek help from counselors.
However, normalization can also work negatively. Toxic behavior on social media platforms, such as harassment or bullying, has been normalized to the point that people may no longer react to it. Thus, while no one bats an eye when a trans person sits in a coffee shop, they also may not react when seeing a trans person harassed online.
It is, ironically, the norm to use the word “norm” in the ways described above. And, to be fair, there is much sociological value in studying fads, popular behaviors, and normalized actions. For instance, why did the Fortnite Floss Dance become so widespread in the 2010s? Or, more intriguing to me, how does a behavior shift from being stigmatized—like outward expressions of gender fluidity—to being normalized?
Norms as shared expectations
For this text, however, norms are not about the most popular or typical behaviors in a given context. Indeed, norms are not about behaviors at all. For sociologists like myself, norms are mental constructs—rules, guidelines, and standards carried in the minds of social beings. While we can’t see these constructs directly, we can deduce them by observing behaviors or by asking individuals through questionnaires. Personally, I prefer the observational approach, as I am skeptical of self-reported data.
This distinction between norms and behaviors helps explain the vast variability in individual human activity, even among people who presumably share the same norms. Individual differences in personality, social position, resources, and learned behaviors influence how norms are expressed. For example, the norm to “be polite in professional emails” might manifest in various ways. A typical email might begin with “Dear Sir or Ma’am” and end with “Respectfully.” However, cultural background or social position can shape adherence to this norm. For instance, individuals from collectivist cultures might include phrases like “I humbly write to...” Meanwhile, women or junior employees might use hedging language—“perhaps,” “maybe,” or “I think”—to soften requests. By observing these behaviors, we can infer the underlying norm of politeness.
The late Peter Berger wrote, “Only the madman or the rare genius can inhabit a world of meaning all by himself” (p. 64). What we see in individuals is almost never a unique, singular occurrence. The variability in how individuals meet norms is reflected at the group level—whether in families, communities, or racial and ethnic groups. This conceptual distinction between behaviors and expectations helps us understand subcultures within a society. Subcultures may share overarching societal norms while expressing them in unique ways.
Now let’s return to Wade’s definition of “shared expectations of behavior”, the expectations are what a specific group of people agree on what they should expect a person to do in each situation. Every human social activity is governed by a latticework of norms, written and unwritten, weakly enforced and strongly enforced. A standard sociology text will classify these norms into folkways, mores, taboos, and laws. I find this classification scheme useful and reflects the reality that we experience. I briefly describe these four categories below using examples from the digital environment. It all starts with a nearly 700-page tome written in 1906 entitled Folkways: A Study of Mores, Manners, Customs and Morals, where our modern understanding of norms begins. I find great value in this past work, even as I critique it in the present.
[To be continued]