Symbolic Interactionism

SOC250By Lauren Webb Jones and Jessica Pyers

1

Introduction: Microsociology- Core Aspects of Symbolic Interactionism- Examples of Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism

Body:- Development of Symbolic Interactionism- Qualitative research and Interactionism- Herbert Blumer- Criticisms- New Developments

Conclusion

Overview

2

Microsociology address small scale interactions. It looks at what we do and how we do it.

Symbolic Interactionism relates to microsociology, as it looks at the local reproduction of the social order.

Microsociology

3

What is Symbolic Interactionism?-Provide some examples

We would like to know what the class thought of the ‘Symbolic Interactionism 2’ reading.

Class Discussion

4

Humans act toward things based on internalised meanings. These meanings eventuate from socialisation. These meanings are handled, modified and interpreted.(Roberts, 2006:50)

The three core aspects can be broken down further to: Meaning Language Thought

The theory developed mainly from the work of G.H Mead, and his interpreter Herbert Blumer.

The core aspects of Symbolic Interactionism

5

A member of the Mafia (let’s call him Joe) receives word from his boss to ‘take out’ a guy. Being one to follow orders, he did so without question and took the guy out to a five star restaurant, then for ice-cream. He returns from work satisfied that he has done what his boss has asked. Unfortunately, the next morning the boss isn’t pleased with him and demands to know why the guy isn’t dead. Joe had assumed ‘take out’ meant to go out for dinner. In the real world, he would probably be killed for this, but let’s just say that he felt rather silly and the boss forgave him.

(Lindsey Nelson used an example similar to this in her paper- Herbert Blumer’s Symbolic Interactionism, 1998).

Case Study

6

Meaning: The man didn’t question his boss because he was acting on the meaning he had assigned to this title, the boss the same, assuming Joe would know exactly what to do, this is ultimately redefined when he fails to do what he asks.

Language: “Take [him] out” has more than one interpretation. From previous social interactions with his friends, Joe has linked ‘take out’ with ‘dine’.

Thought: In Joe’s internal dialogue, the words ‘take out’ were interpreted through Joe’s thought process based on his naming system. From previous interaction with friends, and taking out girls and men and allsorts (not liquorice), he had assigned meaning to the language through symbolic interaction. Based on that meaning from language, Joe had an internal dialogue, and ended up coming to the conclusion that he was going on a dinner date.

Application of Symbolic Interactionism to the case study

7

Let’s break up Symbolic Interactionism even further

with pictures. (because we’re cool like that, and that’s

just how it’s going to go down today).

8

InteractionismA social nexus of interaction >

(at least it’s supposed to be, so shush.)

Speech acts between people lead to naming systems, the identification and discussion of symbols and, of course, discourse eventuates. Naming can assign meaning.

Symbols are socialised understandings of shapes/forms, as all symbolism is widely discussed.

From this, an understanding of the self emerges, this is where the idea of self identity would come into it.

But this is week 5’s subject, and will be covered by Connie and Alexandra.

D D D d

And then you have interaction with symbols and other humans.

So, we’ll take a dandelion.

9

Symbolism

10

Dandelio

n ->

Symbols are socialised understandings of shapes/forms, as all symbolism is widely discussed.

X X X X x

What we can take from this…

Direct perception of the flower tells us that it’s a shape by receiving sense data. It has got funny little coloured things on a green thing, etc. However, once meaning is attributed, shapes will become symbols (think of Apple, or a Giant Yellow M). Humans are able to make an assessment of the shape and realise what it is, and what it means to them. Here, the flower could mean a multitude of things.

Further examples: peace sign, burka

Symbolic Interactionism

11

Symbolic- Cartoon 2

12

Interactionist research has been used most prominently in deviance, workplace and education but also in regards to self identity but has since developed beyond this. (pg 54)

Many micro interactions make up an independent culture. This might be a dominant entity. This segregation is most notable with African American culture and Western society.

Through interaction (usually within one’s segregated entity), a perspective forms and reality is accepted.

This perspective defines the ‘other’, including reasons for differences as well as justification for the inequality.

This perspective can become engrained in culture, as can be seen in Kenneth and Mamie Klark’s “Doll Experiment”.

Application of Symbolic Interactionism

13

Doll Experiment

14

Summary

Social problems can be understood by focusing on interaction, cooperation, communication, culture, and definition’. As such, Symbolic Interactionism can be applied to all racial groups, classes and between nations. As it is in the absence of interaction that segregation occurs and the acts of each other and lack of shared symbols make it difficult to understand one another. “Habitual responses replace cooperative symbolic interactionism”. (J.M, Charon, 2007, pg209)

15

WeberTendency to be an anti-positivist of Verstehen . He tried to get a subjective sense about what it is that people do.

Georg Simmel Discussed social and cultural phenomena in terms of “forms” and “contents”. He coined the term ‘formalism’- the idea that there might be certain kinds of patterns and ways of doing things that are routinised.

American Pragmatism (William James, John Dewey, Charles Peirce and G.H. Mead)

A Philosophical movement. Pragmatists hold things to be true if it works.

G.H. Mead and Herbert BlumerSymbolic Interactionism arose from the work of Mead and his interpreter Blumer. It was actually Blumer that coined the term ‘symbolic Interactionism’ in 1937.

Development of Symbolic Interactionism

16

The three core aspects provide a starting point for understanding Symbolic Interactionism, but there are other assumptions which inform its philosophical basis.

The ‘passive observer’ allows the researcher to watch and record the subject in their environment. They are able to question how features of the environment affect the subject’s interpretation of symbols.

In the wider context of Interactionism, in which symbolic Interactionism is related, researchers have used participant observation to gather data. Much of interactionist research focused on deviance, the work place and schools (Roberts, 2006:54).

Qualitative Research

17

It was Blumer who was responsible for making Mead’s ideas more pronounced.

He challenged the core assumptions of quantitative research, such as the survey.

‘The central aspect of Blumer’s work is the individual as an active, creative being and society as encompassing the interpretations of acting individuals’ (Roberts, 2006:51).

Herbert Blumer

18

He concentrated more on the problems of methodology and theorisation than on actual research.

He did not pay attention to the impact social structures have on individual behaviour.

Blumer insists that meaning arises out of the interaction between people, while some critics point out that meaning is already established in a person’s psychological make-up (Nelson, 1998).

Criticisms of Blumer

19

Symbolic Interactionism suffered a lack of clarity, due to its key idea being passed down and distributed through word of mouth

A concentration of everyday interaction led to an over-concern of minor aspects of social life.

It relied too much on qualitative methodology.

Given its micro-level focus, some have even argued that symbolic interactionism is not microscopic enough, as it tended to ignore psychological factors.

(Ritzer, 1996)

Criticisms of Symbolic Interactionism

20

Since the mid-1980s, Symbolic Interactionists have struggled to show the vitality of symbolic interactionism- as a lively, developing body of work.

They have tried to answer criticisms by integrating micro- and macro level theories and broadening their approach across other fields of study.

Symbolic Interactionism has expanded beyond its concerns with micro-level relations, incorporated ideas from other theories and been adopted by sociologists who would not define themselves as Symbolic Interactionists.

Postmodernist writings have affected interpretive work of symbolic interaction.

New Developments

21

Symbolic interactionism has majorly contributed to micro social theory and it continues to develop new areas for investigation and conceptualisation.

Much of the traditional focus was on the self, but in recent years the field has fragmented, resulting in greater diversity.

It has contributed to our understanding of connections in micro settings.

Conclusion

22

- Charon, J.M. 2007, Symbolic Interactionism: An Introduction, An Interpretation, An Integration, Minnesota State University Moorhead.

- Davis, K. ‘Black doll, White doll,’ accessed on 14/8/2012, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybDa0gSuAcg.

- Nelson, L.D, 1998, ‘Herbert Blumer’s Symbolic Interactionism,’ in Comm 3210: Human Communication Theory, University of Colarado: Boulder, accessed on 14/8/2012, http://www.colorado.edu/communication/meta-discourses/Papers/App_Papers/Nelson.htm.

- Ritzer, G. 1996, Sociological theory, New York: McGraw Hill Companies.

- Roberts, B. 2006, ‘Symbolic Interactionism 2,’ in Micro Social Theory, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.46-61.

References

23