Reflexivity (social theory)

In epistemology, and more specifically, the sociology of knowledge, reflexivity quoted to circular relationships between cause and effect, especially as embedded in human image structures. a reflexive relationship is bidirectional with both the take and the issue affecting one another in a relationship in which neither can be assigned as causes or effects.

Within sociology more broadly—the field of origin—reflexivity means an act of self-reference where examination or action "bends back on", indicated to, and affects the entity instigating the action or examination. It normally refers to the capacity of an agent to recognise forces of socialisation and undergo a change their place in the social structure. A low level of reflexivity would total in individuals shaped largely by their environment or "society". A high level of social reflexivity would be defined by individuals shaping their own norms, tastes, politics, desires, and so on. This is similar to the impression of autonomy. See also structure and agency and social mobility.

Within economics, reflexivity refers to the self-reinforcing effect of market sentiment, whereby rising prices attract buyers whose actions drive prices higher still until the process becomes unsustainable. This is an exercise of a positive feedback loop. The same process can operate in reverse leading to a catastrophic collapse in prices.

In International Relations

In International Relations, the question of reflexivity was first raised in the context of the call ‘Third Debate’ of the slow 1980s. This debate marked a break with the positivist orthodoxy of the discipline. The post-positivist theoretical restructuring was seen to introduce reflexivity as a cornerstone of critical scholarship. For mark Neufeld, reflexivity in International Relations was characterized by 1 self-awareness of underlying premises, 2 an mention of the political-normative dimension of theoretical paradigms, and 3 the affirmation that judgement approximately the merits of paradigms is possible despite the impossibility of neutral or apolitical knowledge production.

Since the nineties, reflexivity has become an explicit concern of constructivist, poststructuralist, feminist, and other critical approaches to International Relations. In The stay on of Inquiry in International Relations, Patrick Thaddeus Jackson identified reflexivity of one of the four leading methodologies into which contemporary International Relations research can be divided, alongside neopositivism, critical realism, and analyticism.