Image as a construct of social reality

G.K. Gizatova^*, O.G. Ivanova^**

Kazan Federal University, Kazan, 420008 Russia

E-mail: ^*gulnaz_gizatova@mail.ru, ^**olga.ivanova.ksu@mail.ru

Received June 9, 2021

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Full text PDF

DOI: 10.26907/2541-7738.2021.4-5.222-229

For citation: Gizatova G.K., Ivanova O.G. Image as a construct of social reality. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2021, vol. 163, no. 4–5, pp. 222–229. doi: 10.26907/2541-7738.2021.4-5.222-229. (In Russian)

Abstract

In this article, the phenomenon of image and its formation were considered. Within the modern system of social knowledge, the concept of image has been widely used in psychology, politics, business, and PR. Social theorists are unanimous in their view that an interdisciplinary approach to studying this phenomenon is needed, because it is complex, multifaceted, and ambivalent. In order to analyze the complexity of image, we used the following methods: interdisciplinary, sociocultural, psycho-semiotic methods, as well as the content analysis of media products. The works of modern Russian and foreign theorists were discussed. Based on the results of the study, several important conclusions were drawn. Image develops under the influence of specific socio-cultural conditions, but, simultaneously, the image of a subject can induce their self-development. Therefore, the process of image formation is inextricably linked with the self-identification of a person, it acts as a mechanism for development of their identity. Like identity, image is a dialectical unity of the permanent and constantly changing, integral and fragmentary. Its formation is influenced by the system of values and social ideals that prevail in a specific historical period. Image is a social construct depending not only on objective factors, but also on subjective components that form broad semiotic and social meanings. In this sense, any image is a text.

Keywords: image, social reality, social construction, semiotics

References

1. Boulding K. The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society. Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, 1956. 175 p.
2. Galumov E.A. Mezhdunarodnyi imidzh Rossii: strategiya formirovaniya [Russia’s International Image: A Strategy for Its Shaping]. Moscow, Izvestiya, 2003. 446 p. (In Russian)
3. Galumov E.A. The strategy for shaping Russia’s image in the aspect of national interests. IAA “MiK”, 2004, Mar. 10. Available at: http://moip.viperson.ru/uploads/attachment/file/3261/ ktenacionalxnyhinteresov.pdf. (In Russian)
4. Galumov E.A. The international image of contemporary Russia: A political analysis. Extended Abstract of Doct. Polit. Diss. Moscow, 2004. 52 p. (In Russian)
5. Galumov E.A. Russia’s image in the global space. Pravovedenie i Politologiya, 2010, Feb. 14. Available at: https://pravo33.wordpress.com/2010/02/14/. (In Russian)
6. Semenenko I.S. Icons and images in the national identity discourse. Polis. Politicheskie Issledovaniya, 2008, no. 5, pp. 7–18. (In Russian)
7. Panasyuk A.Yu. Formirovanie imidzha: strategiya, psikhotekhnologii, psikhotekhniki [Image Formation: Strategy, Psychotechnology, Psychotechniques]. Moscow, Omega-L, 2007. 266 p. (In Russian)
8. Tsvetkova E.A. The culturological concept of image. Vestnik NGTU im. R.E. Alekseeva. Seriya: Upravlenie v Sotsial’nykh Sistemakh. Kommunikativnye Tekhnologii, 2016, no. 1, pp. 91–97. (In Russian)
9. Kalyuzhnaya E.G. Image: Background and cultural justification of the phenomenon. Available at: https://elar.urfu.ru/bitstream/10995/23293/1/iurg-2006-47-05.pdf. (In Russian)
10. Cheremushnikova I.K. Image as an exponent of cultural meanings. Vestnik Volgogradskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya 7, Filosofiya, 2008, no. 2, pp. 86–91. (In Russian)
11. Cheremushnikova I.K. Image as a semantic reality of culture. Vestnik VGU. Seriya: Filosofiya, 2011, no. 1, pp. 146–150. (In Russian)
12. Belobragin V.Ya., Belobragin V.V. Some problems in the development of imagology as a science. Imidzheologiya-2004: sostoyanie, napravleniya, problemy [Proc. Imagology-2004: Status, Trends, Problems]. Moscow, RITs AIM, 2004, pp. 32–36. Available at: http://imageology.ru/content/view/21/. (In Russian)
13. Gavra D.P. The category of image in modern communication science. Zhurnal Sotsiologii i Sotsial’noi Antropologii, 2013, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 29–43. (In Russian)
14. Averin V.A. Psikhologicheskaya struktura lichnosti [Psychological Structure of Personality]. St. Petersburg, Mikhailova V.A., 1999. 89 p. (In Russian)
15. Zhang C., Meadows C.W. International coverage, foreign policy, and national image: Exploring the complexities of media coverage, public opinion, and presidential agenda. International Journal of Communication, 2012, vol. 6, pp. 76–96.
16. Gizatova G.K., Ivanova O.G. National mentality and intercultural interaction in a multicultural society. European Science and Technology: Proc. X Int. Res. Pract. Conf. Vol. I. Munich, Germany, Vela Verlag Waldkraiburg, 2015, pp. 287–291. (In Russian)
17. This Week’s Citation Classic, 1988, Nov. 28, no. 48. Available at: https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/ classics1988/A1988Q864300001.pdf.
18. Lotman Yu.M. Semiotics of culture and concept of text. In: Lotman Yu.M. Stat’i po semiotike kul’tury i iskusstva [Articles on Semiotics of Culture and Arts]. St. Petersburg, Akad. Proekt, 2002, pp. 84–92. (In Russian)

The content is available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.