Symbolic Interactionism is a major sociological perspective that is influential in many areas of the discipline. It is particularly important in Microsociology and Social Psychology.
Symbolic Interactionism is derived from American pragmatism and particularly from
the work of George Herbert Mead, who argued that people's selves are social products
-
Another pioneer in the area was Charles Cooley. Herbert Blumer was a student and interpreter of Mead who coined the term ‘Symbolic Interactionism’ and put forward an influential summary of the perspective: people act toward things based on the meaning those things have for them; and these meanings are derived from social interaction and modified through interpretation.
Sociologists working in this tradition have researched a wide range of topics using
a variety of research methods. However, the majority of interactionist research uses
qualitative research methods, like participant observation, to study aspects of:-
- social interaction
- individuals' selves
Sociological areas that have been particularly influenced by Symbolic Interactionism include the sociology of emotions, the Sociology of health and illness, deviance/criminology, collective behaviour/social movements, and the sociology of sex. Interactionist concepts that have gained widespread usage include definition of the situation, emotion work, impression management, looking glass self, and total institution.
Erving Goffman, although he claimed not to have been a symbolic interactionist, is recognized as one of the major contributors to the perspective. Goffman focussed in particular on the presentation of the ‘self’ and aspects of impression management.
Blumer (1969), who coined the term set out three basic premises of the perspective:-
- "Human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings they ascribe to those things."
- "The meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social interaction that one has with others and the society."
- “These meanings are handled in and modified through an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things he/she encounters.”
Blumer (1963), following Mead, claimed that people interact with each and other by interpreting or defining each other's actions instead of merely reacting to each other's actions. Their 'response' is not made directly to the actions of one another but instead is based on the meaning which they attach to such actions. Thus, human interaction is mediated by the use of symbols and signification, by interpretation, or by ascertaining the meaning of one another's actions Blumer contrasted this process, which he called ‘symbolic interaction’, with Behaviourist explanations of human behavior, which don't allow for interpretation between stimulus and response.
Symbolic Interactionist researchers investigate how people create meaning during
social interaction, how they present and construct the self (or ‘identity’), and
how they define situations of co-
Evaluation
Although symbolic interactionist concepts have gained widespread use among sociologists, the perspective has been criticised, particularly during the 1970s when quantitative approaches to Sociology were dominant.
In addition to methodological criticisms, critics of Symbolic Interactionism have charged that it is unable to deal with social structure (a fundamental sociological concern) and macrosociological issues.
However, one only needs to look at the Lower Quadrants of 4Q/8L, developed by Don
Beck (2000, 2002) from Ken Wilber’s All Quadrants/All Levels approach to realise
that the concerns of Symbolic Interactionism, by and large, were never going to be
those of Structural Functionalism. While the latter is concerned with the structure
of institutions in society and their functions and, thus, sits in the Lower Right
Quadrant, the former concerns itself with the meanings groups and sub-