Symbolic Interactionism

• key thinkers

  • Mead
  • Blumer
  • Cooley
  • Goffman
• instinct


  fixed, pre-programmed response to a stimulus
• symbol

  something that stands for or represents something else
• interpretive phase

  before we know how to respond to the stimulus, we have to interpret its meaning
• taking on the role of the other - Mead


  putting ourselves in the place of the other person and seeing ourselves as they see us

  how? - through social interaction, first as young children through imitative play then seeing ourselves from the point of view of wider community
• key principles of symbolic interaction - Blumer

  • our actions are based on the meanings we give to situations, events, people etc
  • unlike animals, our actions are not based on automatic responses to stimuli
  • meanings arise from the interaction process
  • not fixed at the outset of the interaction but are negotiable and changeable to some extent
  • meanings we give situations are the result of the interpretive procedures we use - especially taking the role of the other
• labelling theory - definition


  a definition of something is a label for that thing

  W.I. Thomas - if people define a situation as real then it will have real consequences

  if we believe something to be true then this belief will affect how we act, may have consequences for those involved
• labelling theory - looking glass self


  Cooley - describe how we develop our self-concept, our idea of who we are

  self-concept comes from the ability to take the role of the other - others act as a looking glass to us, we see ourself mirrored in the way they respond to us, we come to see ourselves as the way others see us - self fulfilling prophecy
• labelling theory - career


  stages through which an individual progresses in the label

  e.g. mental illnesses - individual having a career running from 'pre-patient' with certain symptoms - labelling by psychiatrist - hospital in-patient - discharge

  each stage has its own status and problem
• dramaturgical model - Goffman: presentation of self


  we seek to present a particular image of ourselves to our audiences
• dramaturgical model - Goffman: impression management


  control the impression our performance gives - involves constantly studying our audience to see how the respond - use of language, tone of voice, gestures, dress, make-up etc
• dramaturgical model - Goffman: roles


  there is a 'gap' or 'role distance' between our real self and our roles

  roles are only loosely scripted by society and and we have a good deal of freedom in how we play them

  we do not always believe in the roles we play
• evaluation

  avoids determinism of structural theories

  loose collection of descriptive concepts than an explanatory theory

  focus on face-to-face interactions + ignore wider social structures

  fail to explain origin of labels - cannot explain consistent patterns we observe in people's behaviour

  Reynolds - evidence show interactionism lacks idea of structure - questionnaire to 124 interactionist, 84 responded, asked to identify concepts they felt were essential - most popular was role-38, self-37, interaction-37, only 2 chose power + class - concepts structural sociologists see as crucial
• evaluation

  not all action is meaningful - much is performed unconsciously or routinely and have little meaning for actors - interactionism lacks the means to explain it

  Goffman's dramaturgical analogy is useful but has limitations - interactions everyone plays both actor and audience, interactions are often improvised and unrehearsed

  ethnomethodologists argue interactionism is correct in focusing on actor's meanings but fails to explain how actors create meanings