17 Major Sociological Theories

Theories, Concepts and Frameworks

1. Symbolic Interaction Theory
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Marx Weber
2. George Herbert Mead
3. Charles Horton Cooley
4. Erving Goffman
5. Herbert Blumer
6. Harold Garfinkel
Konklusi

2. Conflict Theory
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Karl Marx
2. György Lukács
3. Antonio Gramsci
Konklusi

3. Functionalist Theory
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Emile Durkheim
2. Talcot Parson
3. Robert Merton
Konklusi

4. Feminist Theory
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex,
2. Betty Friedan, The Feminist Mystique (1963)
3. Patricia Hill Collins, Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and the
Politics of Empowerment.
4. Susan Faludi, Backlash:The Undeclared War against Women, 1991,
Konklusi

5. Critical Theory
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
Frankfurt School
 1. Max Horkheimer
2. Theodor Adorno
3. Erich Fromm
4. Walter Benjamin
5. Jürgen Habermas
6. Herbert Marcuse
Konklusi

6. Labeling Theory
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Howard Becker
2. Frank Tannenbaum
3. Edwin Lemert
4. Albert Memmi
5. David Matza
Konklusi

7. Social Learning Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Albert Bandura
2. B.F. Skinner
Konklusi

8. Structural Strain Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
Robert K. Merton
Konklusi

9. Rational Choice Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. James S. Coleman
2. Karen S. Cook
Konklusi

10. Game Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. John Nash
 2. John von Neumann.
Konklusi
11. Sociobiology
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Edward O. Wilson
2. Richard Lewontin
3. Stephen Jay Gould
Konklusi

12. Social Exchange Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. George Homans
2. Peter Blau
3. Richard Emerson
Konklusi

13. Chaos Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
Edward Lorenz
Konklusi

14. Social Phenomenology

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Peter Berger
2. Hansfried Kellner
3. Edmund Husserl
4. Alfred Schutz
Konklusi

15. Disengagement Theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Elaine Cumming and William Earle Henry
2. Arlie Hochschild
Konklusi

16. Post-colonial theory

Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
 1. Edward Said
2. Gayatri Spivak
3. Homi K. Bhabha
4. Dipesh Chakrabarty
5. Derek Gregory
6. Amar Acheraiou
Konklusi

17. Postmodernism
Akar Pemikiran dan Framework
Konsep dan Tokoh Utama
1. Michael Foucault
2. Loytard
3. J. Derrida
4. Pierre Bourdieu
5. A. Giddens
Konklusi

Network theory: Harrison White

Pure sociology: Donald Black

Control theory: Travis Hirschi

Social disorganization theory

Subcultural theory

Containment theory

[ see: Crossman, Ashley. (2019, May 4). Major Sociological Theories. Retrieved from
https://www.thoughtco.com/sociology-research-and-statistics-s2-3026650]

What Is Symbolic Interactionism?

The symbolic interaction perspective, also called symbolic interactionism, is a
major framework of the sociological theory. This perspective relies on the
symbolic meaning that people develop and build upon in the process of social
interaction. Although symbolic interactionism traces its origins to Max Weber's
assertion that individuals act according to their interpretation of the meaning of
their world, the American philosopher George Herbert Mead introduced this
perspective to American sociology in the 1920s.

The Subjective Meanings

Symbolic interaction theory analyzes society by addressing the subjective
meanings that people impose on objects, events, and behaviors. Subjective
meanings are given primacy because it is believed that people behave based on
what they believe and not just on what is objectively true. Thus, society is thought
to be socially constructed through human interpretation. People interpret one
another’s behavior, and it is these interpretations that form the social bond.
These interpretations are called the “definition of the situation.”

For example, why would young people smoke cigarettes even when all objective
medical evidence points to the dangers of doing so? The answer is in the
definition of the situation that people create. Studies find that teenagers are well
informed about the risks of tobacco, but they also think that smoking is cool, that
they will be safe from harm, and that smoking projects a positive image to their
peers. So, the symbolic meaning of smoking overrides the facts regarding
smoking and risk.

Fundamental Aspects of Social Experience and Identities

Some fundamental aspects of our social experience and identities,
like race and gender, can be understood through the symbolic interactionist lens.
Having no biological bases at all, both race and gender are social constructs that
function based on what we believe to be true about people, given what they look
like. We use socially constructed meanings of race and gender to help us decide
who to interact with, how to do so, and to help us determine, sometimes
inaccurately, the meaning of a person's words or actions.

One shocking example of how this theoretical concept plays out within the social
construct of race is manifested in the fact that many people, regardless of race,
believe that lighter skinned blacks and Latinos are smarter than their darker
skinned counterparts. This phenomenon, called colorism, occurs because of the
racist stereotype that has been encoded in skin color over centuries. Concerning
gender, we see the problematic way in which meaning is attached to the symbols
"man" and "woman" in the sexist trend of college students routinely rating male
professors more highly than female ones. Or, in pay inequality based on gender.

Critics of Symbolic Interaction Perspective

Critics of this theory claim that symbolic interactionism neglects the macro level
of social interpretation. In other words, symbolic interactionists may miss the
more significant issues of society by focusing too closely on the “trees” rather
than the “forest.” The perspective also receives criticism for slighting the
influence of social forces and institutions on individual interactions. In the case
of smoking, the functionalist perspective might miss the powerful role that the
institution of mass media plays in shaping perceptions of smoking through
advertising, and by portraying smoking in film and television. In the cases of race
and gender, this perspective would not account for social forces like systemic
racism or gender discrimination, which strongly influence what we believe race
and gender mean.

1 SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM Ume Habiba

2 Symbols Establish meanings Develop their views Communicate with each other Society

3 18 th C, Scottish Philosopher individuals evaluate their own conduct by comparing themselves

with others (Stryker 1990) American psychologist William James (1842–1910) and the educator
John Dewey (1859–1952), who analyzed how people use symbols to understand their experiences.
University Of Chicago 1920. George Herbert Mead bought this perspective to sociology by his work
After Mead’s death in 1931 his students Herbert Blumer at the University published his teachings.
Herbert Blumer, Mead’s pupil, coined “Symbolic Interactio nism.” Mead, Cooley, William I. Thomas
and Erving Goffman

4 Symbolic Interactionism Visualized Husband and Wife Talk You greet Your neighbor on the way
to work Society You respond to your boss’s email Give up your seat on the bus for the elderly
woman Move to the next lane on highway for the car on exit ramp Tuck the children into bed Text
your friend about the sale Smile at the barista at the coffee shop

5 Herbert Blumer (1969) set out 3 basic premises of symbolic interactionism: Construction of social
realityMeaning To us humans the word “grass” is something that can be defined as green, or
something needed to be cut. To animals, the word “grass” could mean shelter or food. The source of
meaningLanguage Meaning is developed through the use of language with each other. Mead
believed that when you named something, it is assigned a meaning. An example of this would be me
naming my dog Lucifer. The meaning of this name would be the devil, because maybe the dog is
extremely mean or bites people all of the time. The process of taking the role of others Thought
Interpretation of symbols is modified through his/her own thought processes. Thinking is described
as inner conversation, called Minding that is reflecting & figuring out your next move depending on
imagining how we look to another person.

7 Charles Horton Cooley George Herbert Mead Self Defined through interconnection of meaning,
language and thought Development of Self Self is a social product that is created & modified through
interaction Theories about development of Self W. I. Thomas Erving Goffman Aspects of self I is
Impulsive(unsocial) & Me is reflective(social) Stages of Self 1. Preparatory Stage (imitate significant
others) 2. Play Stage (taking the role of others) 3.Game Stage (Generalized others) Looking Glass
Self 1. Imagine how we look to others 2. Evaluate other reaction 3. Develop self concept on basis of
evaluation Thomas Theorem If people define as real, they are real in their consequences Definition
of situation Subjective component of experiences, an agreement to others about “what's going on” in
a given circumstance He looks the definition of situations not just cognitively but interactionally by 1.
Expression of behavior 2. Expression Givens 3. Expression Given off Impression management
Dramaturgy

1 Symbolic Interactionism
Sheldon Stryker

2 IntroductionSymbolic Interactionism is both a general framework for the analysis of society and a
social psychological theory addressed to problems of socializationTheory vs. Frames of Reference:-
“Theory”(1) Is a set of logically related hypotheses specifying expected relationships among
variables(2) Is based on concepts describing selected aspects of the world and assumptions about
the way it works, and open to falsification through evidence drawn from the world(3) Incorporates the
concepts provided by a frame of reference- “Frame of reference(1) For sociologist, symbolic
interactionism is a frame of reference or a perspective(2) It must give short shrift to some potentially
significant determinants of social behavior by the very act of directing attention to its special
concerns

3 The Scottish Moral Philosophers

Empiricism-Philosophy is the science of the connecting principles of nature-Empiricism and induction
can lead to useful knowledgeCommunication-Sympathy is the source of human action-For Adam
Smith, sympathy is a universal human trait, largely unlearned, which allows us to put ourselves in
another’s place and to see the world through other person’s eyes-It is through communicating with
others that we first learn about ourselves

4 William James (1842-1910) Habit The Self -The basis of habit is memory
-Instincts are both modifiable and transitiveThe Self-It is “the sum total of all that an individual can
call his”-Four types of self—the material self; the spiritual self; the social self; pure ego-The social
self-is in the recognition given one by others; derivative of relationships with others-emphasizes on
the self’s multifaceted character multifaceted self as the product of heterogeneously organized
society-one’s self-worth/self-esteem is a function of the ratio of success to pretensiontwo basis of
self-esteem: objective basis=the recognition one gets from others; subjective basis=one’s own
aspirations

5 James Mark Baldwin (1861-1934) Personality Development

(1) Projective Stage—being aware of others, drawing differences between them and objects(2)
Subjective Stage—emergence of self-consciousness through imitating the behavior of others and
learning that there are feeling states associated with such behavior(3) Ejective Stage—associates
feeling states with its conceptions of persons and becomes aware that other persons have feeling
states just as it does

6 John Dewey (1859 - 1952) Habit Pragmatism

-personality organization is a primarily function of habit-social organization is a primarily function of
custom-habits reflect a prior social order and they are the basis of thought andreflectionPragmatism-
human is unique because of their capacity of thinking-mind is the process of thinking; thinking arises
in the process of human’s adjusting to their environment-mind is instrumental and it is the process of
defining objects in one’s world“The Reflex Arc Concept in Psychology” (1896)-a stimulus is defined
in the context of action rather than prior to and a cause of that action

7 Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929)

Social life and individual-“Social life is a vast tissue of reciprocal activity”-Society and individuals are
interwoven togetherSocial Self (the reflected/looking glass self)-The self is a social product; it is
defined and developed in social action-Three components:(1) Imagination of our appearance to
other person(2) Imagination of other person’s judgment to ourappearance(3) Self-feeling from these
imaginations

8 W. I. Thomas (1863-1947) Methodology Basic Position

-Any human behavior needs to cope with the subjective and objective facts of experience-
Adjustment processes are responses to objective circumstances in which individuals and groups are
embeddedDefinitions of the situation-Subjective components of experience-"If men define situations
as real, they are real in their consequences”Methodology-Personal documents (case studies,
diaries, letters…) studies-They provide the participant's definition of the situation that purely
observation and statistical studies failed to do

9 George Hebert Mead (1863-1931) Three traditions

(1) Pragmatism—individuals create their own world(2) Behaviorism—reinforcement(3) Darwinism—
human beings have conscious thoughtsEvolutionary Principles-The best way to study human
behavior is from the viewpoint that society is an ongoing processSocial acts-Conversation of
gestures-Significant symbols

10 George Hebert Mead The Self -It is a product of social interaction

-It is a social structure and it arises in social experience-It exists in the activity of viewing oneself
reflexively-“Role-taking”: taking the standpoint of others- “I” and “Me”-“I”—the responses of the
person to the organized attitudes of others; contains the creativity and spontaneity parts of the self-
“Me”—anticipated responses with respect to oneself-Three stages in developing the self: play stage,
game stage, generalized others

11 George Simmel (1858-1918) Approach to Sociological Theory (1) Society

-is “the name for a number of individuals, connected by interaction”-is a structure of positions
(vocations)(2) Forms of social life-social process, social types, developmental patterns(3) Sociation-
is the interaction of minds, the conscious association of person-sociation requires individual to be
“generalized”: the individual must be more than or less than an individual personality to be a part of
society

12 Ralph Linton (1893-1953) Anthropological Methodology

(1) Society=“any group of people who have lived and worked together long enough to get
themselves organized and to think of themselves as a social unity with well-defined limits”(2) Ideal
patterns=remembered and rationalized experiences of adapting to the environment in which the
society existsthese guide the training of the members of society(3) Status=the polar positions in the
ideal patterns; it is a collection of rights and duties

13 The Social Person Role -Status & Position

-Role Theory: “status” and “position” refer to the parts of organized social groups-S.I.: “position”
refers to any socially recognized category of actors-“Role”=expectations which are attached to
positions-Actors categorize themselves and respond to themselves by naming, classifying, and
defining who and what they are to engage in such reflexive behavior is to have a self.

14 The Social Person Self -The self is a product of social interaction

-It is phenomenological-Is is based on reflexive activity-It has no physical or biological location-
Mead: “One’s self is the way one describes to himself hisrelationship to other in a social process.”-
Stryker’s concept of self:-identity—is parts of self; is internalized positional designations-identity
salience—refers to one possible, theoretically important way in which the self can be organized-
Salience hierarchy—the higher the identity in the hierarchy, the more likely that the identity will be
invoked in a given or in many situations-commitment—commitments are premised on identities

15 The Social Person Role-Taking Socialization

-The process of anticipating the responses of others with whom one is involved in social interaction-
Actors use the result of their role-taking to sustain, modify, and redirect their own behavior-It is one
way persons learn how others locate them and of others’ expectations for their
behaviorSocialization-It is the process by which the newcomer becomes incorporate into organized
patterns of interaction-Once a self has been formed through this interactive process it serves to
modify subsequent experience

16 Social Structure System

-Anything that can be analyzed into a set of parts so that one part is in some way dependent on
each of the remaining parts.-The self can be conceptualized as a set of discrete identities organized
into a hierarchy of salience is to say that the self is a system composed of interrelated parts.-Social
Interaction-Interactions can be short (two persons say hello to another) or long (the relationships
between doctor and patient, parent and child)-Longer interactions develop expectations with respect
to the properties that are be observed in the interactions

17 Social Structure System -Group

-Networks of interaction with a high degree of closure-It is structured by both cooperative and
conflictful interactions-Groups are systems of interpersonal relationships which tend to be
normatively defined, or to contain normative elements-Groups are structures of differentiated
relationships; they are structures of positions and roles-Groups is formed of people sharing some
structural characteristic (age, class, ethnicity…etc.)-Scheduling-One of the social mechanisms to
isolate groups from one another or to guarantee that contact will happen

18 Social Structure Role Conflict

-It happens when there are incompatible expectations that attach to some position in a social
relationship-It may be intrarole or interrlole-Resolution of role conflict: withdrawal from the
relationship that are the source of conflict; scheduling and allocation of different relationships and
activities to different time slots

19 Social StructureRole Strain-It is caused by the problem of maintaining continuity-It can be

defined as a felt difficulty in filling role obligations-Mechanism to reduce role strain: elimination of
some role relationships; establish interactional role bargains that minimize costs-“Role-set”

20 QuestionWhy does that Stryker says symbolic interactionism is a frame of reference rather than
an adequate theory?

Haley HuttonNick LarsenSoc 401

2 Background Term "Symbolic Interactionism" coined by Herbert Blumer

Wanted to clarify how social psych. was largely interested in the social development of the
individualCentral task is to study how individuals develop socially as a result of participating in group
lifeFocuses on issue of "self" and small group interactions

3 Intellectual Influences
Charles Darwin's EvolutionLed Symbolic Interactionists to believe behavior is not accidental, but
formed by interaction with others in social environmentsScottish MoralistsBelieved "mind" and "self"
were social products of individuals actions with others

4 Intellectual Influences cont.

German IdealismHumans construct their own realitiesAll consciousness is conscious of something,
therefore the subject and object are inevitably relatedPragmatismOne "true reality" does not
existReality is actively created by human beingsThe meaning placed depends on the purpose of the
act, context in which it's performed, and the reaction of others to the act

5 Intellectual Influences cont.

BehaviorismNeed to find as simple an approach to the study of the experience of individuals from
the point of view of their conduct

6 What is Symbolic Interactionism?

Based on the idea that social reality is constructed in each human interaction through the use of
symbols - words, gestures, and communicating through languageStudying social interaction is key to
understanding human behaviorAbility of actors to modify their behaviors to meet the needs of the
present and immediate environment

7 Erving Goffman (1922-1982) Canadian-born sociologist and writer

The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959)Heavily Influenced by Durkheim, Freud, Mead,
Simmel

8 Erving Goffman cont. Presentation of Self

Focus on the individual as active and reflectiveIndividual determines how the self should be
presented in social situationsSociety is viewed as a stage, and humans are actors performing for
audiences
9 Erving Goffman cont. Stigma Mark of disgrace or dishonor
Person lacks social acceptance and their self identity is negatively affected by the labelExample:
Arabs & Muslims after 9/11

10 Herbert Blumer ( )Symbolic Interactionist and Social ResearcherPlayed pro football while getting
his doctorate!Huge proponent of Mead, andbelieved the creation of realityis a continuous
process"Humans act toward things onthe basics of meanings"

11 Herbert Blumer Methodology

Naturalistic Approach - Study of conduct and group life, as these occur naturally in the everyday
existence of people.Need for exploratory studies...A great deal of human group life is hidden from
immediate noticeSocial scientists generally do not have first hand, intimate familiarity with the group
life they propose to studyFocuses on the importance of in-depth knowledge of the group using
interviews and observations, and steering away from vagueness when defining concepts

12 Arlie Russell Hochschild

American sociologistBachelors, Masters and PH.D from BerkleyThe Unexpected CommunityThe
Managed HeartThe Time Bind: When work becomes home and home becomes workFounder of the
sociology of emotionsEmotions are a biologically given senseMeans by which we know about our
relation to the worldCritical for survival of humans in group life

13 Arlie Russell Hochschild cont

Emotion WorkTrying to change, in degree or quality, an emotion or feelingEmotion CultureConsists
of a series of ideas about how and what people are supposed to experience in given
situationsIndividuals are often put in situations where emotion work needs to be performedCulture is
filled with ideologies about the behaviors, attitudes and feelings that members should share

14 Criticism of Symbolic Interactionism

Overly committed the study of everyday life and social formation of the self, while ignoring social
structureOverlooked class relations and constraints in favor of a more optimistic view of an open
society

Symbolic interactionism is a micro-level theory that focuses on the relationships

among individuals within a society. Communication—the exchange of meaning through
language and symbols—is believed to be the way in which people make sense of their
social worlds. Theorists Herman and Reynolds (1994) note that this perspective sees
people as being active in shaping the social world rather than simply being acted upon.

George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) is considered a founder of symbolic interactionism

though he never published his work on it (LaRossa and Reitzes 1993). Mead’s student,
Herbert Blumer, coined the term “symbolic interactionism” and outlined these basic
premises: humans interact with things based on meanings ascribed to those things; the
ascribed meaning of things comes from our interactions with others and society; the
meanings of things are interpreted by a person when dealing with things in specific
circumstances (Blumer 1969). If you love books, for example, a symbolic interactionist
might propose that you learned that books are good or important in the interactions you
had with family, friends, school, or church; maybe your family had a special reading time
each week, getting your library card was treated as a special event, or bedtime stories
were associated with warmth and comfort.

Social scientists who apply symbolic-interactionist thinking look for patterns of

interaction between individuals. Their studies often involve observation of one-on-one
interactions. For example, while a conflict theorist studying a political protest might
focus on class difference, a symbolic interactionist would be more interested in how
individuals in the protesting group interact, as well as the signs and symbols protesters

use to communicate their message. The

focus on the importance of symbols in building a society led sociologists like Erving
Goffman (1922–1982) to develop a technique called dramaturgical analysis. Goffman
used theater as an analogy for social interaction and recognized that people’s
interactions showed patterns of cultural “scripts.” Because it can be unclear what part a
person may play in a given situation, he or she has to improvise his or her role as the
situation unfolds (Goffman 1958).

Studies that use the symbolic interactionist perspective are more likely to use qualitative
research methods, such as in-depth interviews or participant observation, because they
seek to understand the symbolic worlds in which research subjects live.

Constructivism is an extension of symbolic interaction theory which proposes that

reality is what humans cognitively construct it to be. We develop social constructs based
on interactions with others, and those constructs that last over time are those that have
meanings which are widely agreed-upon or generally accepted by most within the
society. This approach is often used to understand what’s defined as deviant within a
society. There is no absolute definition of deviance, and different societies have
constructed different meanings for deviance, as well as associating different behaviors
with deviance. One situation that illustrates this is what you believe you’re to do if you
find a wallet in the street. In the United States, turning the wallet in to local authorities
would be considered the appropriate action, and to keep the wallet would be seen as
deviant. In contrast, many Eastern societies would consider it much more appropriate to
keep the wallet and search for the owner yourself; turning it over to someone else, even
the authorities, would be considered deviant behavior.

BRING IT HOME
The main tenets of symbolic interactionism are explained in the following video.

Click on the image to open the video in a new tab.

Criticism

Research done from this perspective is often scrutinized because of the difficulty of
remaining objective. Others criticize the extremely narrow focus on symbolic interaction.
Proponents, of course, consider this one of its greatest strengths.

FARMING AND LOCAVORES: HOW SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES MIGHT

VIEW FOOD CONSUMPTION

The consumption of food is a commonplace, daily occurrence, yet it can also be associated with
important moments in our lives. Eating can be an individual or a group action, and eating habits
and customs are influenced by our cultures. In the context of society, our nation’s food system is
at the core of numerous social movements, political issues, and economic debates. Any of
these factors might become a topic of sociological study.
A structural-functional approach to the topic of food consumption might be interested in the
role of the agriculture industry within the nation’s economy and how this has changed from the
early days of manual-labor farming to modern mechanized production. Another examination
might study the different functions that occur in food production: from farming and harvesting to
flashy packaging and mass consumerism.
A conflict theorist might be interested in the power differentials present in the regulation of
food, by exploring where people’s right to information intersects with corporations’ drive for profit
and how the government mediates those interests. Or a conflict theorist might be interested in
the power and powerlessness experienced by local farmers versus large farming
conglomerates, such as the documentary Food Inc. depicts as resulting from Monsanto’s
patenting of seed technology. Another topic of study might be how nutrition varies between
different social classes.
A sociologist viewing food consumption through a symbolic interactionist lens would be
more interested in micro-level topics, such as the symbolic use of food in religious rituals, or the
role it plays in the social interaction of a family dinner. This perspective might also study the
interactions among group members who identify themselves based on their sharing a particular
diet, such as vegetarians (people who don’t eat meat) or locavores (people who strive to eat
locally produced food).

Sociological Theory Today

These three approaches are still the main foundation of modern sociological theory, but
some evolution has been seen. Structural-functionalism was a dominant force after
World War II and until the 1960s and 1970s. At that time, sociologists began to feel that
structural-functionalism did not sufficiently explain the rapid social changes happening
in the United States at that time.

Conflict theory then gained prominence, as there was renewed emphasis on

institutionalized social inequality. Critical theory, and the particular aspects of feminist
theory and critical race theory, focused on creating social change through the
application of sociological principles, and the field saw a renewed emphasis on helping
ordinary people understand sociology principles, in the form of public sociology.

Postmodern social theory attempts to look at society through an entirely new lens by
rejecting previous macro-level attempts to explain social phenomena. Generally
considered as gaining acceptance in the late 1970s and early 1980s, postmodern social
theory is a micro-level approach that looks at small, local groups and individual reality.
Its growth in popularity coincides with the constructivist aspects of symbolic
interactionism.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Review the major sociological theories (excluding social constructionism) again in the following
video.

PRACTICE

1. A symbolic interactionist may compare social interactions to:

a. behaviors
b. conflicts
 c. human organs
d. theatrical roles
Show Answer
2. Which research technique would most likely be used by a symbolic interactionist?
a. Surveys
b. Participant observation
c. Quantitative data analysis
d. None of the above
Show Answer
Show Glossary

Self-Check: Theoretical Perspectives

You’ll have more success on the Self-Check, if you’ve completed the five Readings, and
watched the Videos in this section.

1.3D: The Symbolic Interactionist Perspective

1. Last updated
Oct 7, 2019

2.
o 1.3C: The Conflict Perspective

o 1.3E: The Feminist Perspective

3. picture_as_pdf
Readability
Donate

Symbolic interactionism looks at individual and group meaning-making, focusing on

human action instead of large-scale social structures.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
 Examine the differences between symbolic interactionism and other sociological
perspectives
Key Points
  Symbolic interactionism has roots in phenomenology, which emphasizes the
subjective meaning of reality.
 Symbolic interactionism proposes a social theory of the self, or a looking glass
self.
 Symbolic interactionists study meaning and communication; they tend to use
qualitative methods.
 Symbolic interactionism has been criticized for failing to take into account large-
scale macro social structures and forces.

Key Terms
 behaviorism: an approach to psychology focusing on behavior, denying any
independent significance for mind, and assuming that behavior is determined by
the environment
 phenomenology: A philosophy based on the intuitive experience of phenomena,
and on the premise that reality consists of objects and events as consciously
perceived by conscious beings.
 role theory: assumes that people are primarily conformists who try to achieve
the norms that accompany their roles; group members check each individual’s
performance to determine whether it conforms with that individual’s assigned
norms, and apply sanctions for misbehavior in an attempt to ensure role
performance.

Symbolic interactionism is a theoretical approach to understanding the relationship

between humans and society. The basic notion of symbolic interactionism is that human
action and interaction are understandable only through the exchange of meaningful
communication or symbols. In this approach, humans are portrayed as acting, as opposed
to being acted upon. The main principles of symbolic interactionism are:

 Human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that things have for
them
 These meanings arise out of social interaction
 Social action results from a fitting together of individual lines of action

This approach stands in contrast to the strict behaviorism of psychological theories

prevalent at the time it was first formulated (the 1920s and 1930s). According to symbolic
interactionism, humans are distinct from infrahumans (lower animals) because
infrahumans simply respond to their environment (i.e., a stimulus evokes a response or
stimulus ⇒ response), whereas humans have the ability to interrupt that process (i.e.,
stimulus ⇒ cognition ⇒ response). Additionally, infrahumans are unable to conceive of
alternative responses to gestures. Humans, however, can. This understanding should not be
taken to indicate that humans never behave in a strict stimulus ⇒ response fashion, but
rather that humans have the capability of responding in a different way, and do so much of
the time.

This perspective is also rooted in phenomenological thought. According to symbolic

interactionism, the objective world has no reality for humans; only subjectively defined
objects have meaning. There is no single objective “reality”; there are only (possibly
multiple, possibly conflicting) interpretations of a situation. Meanings are not entities that
are bestowed on humans and learned by habituation; instead, meanings can be altered
through the creative capabilities of humans, and individuals may influence the many
meanings that form their society. Human society, therefore, is a social product.

The Looking Glass Self

Neurological evidence, based on EEGs, supports the idea that humans have a “social
brain,” meaning, there are components of the human brain that govern social interaction.
These parts of the brain begin developing in early childhood (the preschool years) and aid
humans in understanding how other people think. In symbolic interactionism, this is known
as “reflected appraisals” or “the looking glass self,” and refers to our ability to think about
how other people will think about us. In 1902, Charles Horton Cooley developed the social
psychological concept of the looking glass self. The term was first used in his work, Human
Nature and the Social Order. There are three main components of the looking glass self:
 Charles Cooley: Cooley developed the idea of the looking glass self.

 We imagine how we must appear to others

 We imagine the judgment of that appearance
 We develop our self through the judgments of others

Cooley clarified this concept in his writings, stating that society is an interweaving and
interworking of mental selves.

In hypothesizing the framework for the looking glass self, Cooley said, “the mind is
mental” because “the human mind is social. ” As children, humans begin to define
themselves within the context of their socializations. The child learns that the symbol of
his/her crying will elicit a response from his/her parents, not only when they are in need of
necessities, such as food, but also as a symbol to receive their attention.

George Herbert Mead described self as “taking the role of the other,” the premise for which
the self is actualized. Through interaction with others, we begin to develop an identity
about who we are, as well as empathy for others. This is the notion of, “Do unto others, as
you would have them do unto you. ” In respect to this, Cooley said, “The thing that moves
us to pride or shame is not the mere mechanical reflection of ourselves, but an imputed
sentiment, the imagined effect of this reflection upon another’s mind. ”
It should be noted that symbolic interactionists advocate a particular methodology. Because
they see meaning as the fundamental component of the interaction of human and society,
studying human and social interaction requires an understanding of that meaning. Symbolic
interactionists tend to employ more qualitative, rather than quantitative, methods in their
research.

The most significant limitation of the symbolic interactionist perspective relates to its
primary contribution: it overlooks macro-social structures (e.g., norms, culture) as a result
of focusing on micro-level interactions. Some symbolic interactionists, however, would
counter that the incorporation of role theory into symbolic interactionism addresses this
criticism.

The Looking Glass Self: This drawing depicts the looking-glass self. The person at the
front of the image is looking into four mirrors, each of which reflects someone else’s
image of himself.

This lesson describes a way of looking at the world that focuses on communication, meaning and
symbols. You'll review a real-world example of this approach and explore the criticisms from those
who prefer other sociological methods.
Definition of Symbolic Interactionism
Paradigms provide a starting place to help understand what is being witnessed in day-to-day life
and in experiments. If you imagine that paradigms are like lenses in a pair of eyeglasses, there are
several different lens styles worn by sociologists and symbolic interactionism is one of them.
Symbolic interactionism tends to focus on the language and symbols that help us give meaning to
the experiences in our life. They notice that as we interact with the world, we change the way we
behave based on the meaning we give social interactions. We spend time thinking about what we
will do next and adjust our approach depending on how we believe others perceive us.
Social interactionists believe that communications and interactions form reality as we know it.
Reality, in this belief, is socially constructed, or created by conversations, thoughts, and ideas.
Early thinkers in this approach focused on the face-to-face experiences of individuals, though now
we would likely include many more types of interactions, including the experiences we have online or
through text messaging on our phones, for instance.

A girl uses her cell phone to interact with others and create her own reality

In this view, individuals are powerful in how they shape the world and not merely victims conforming
to larger societal forces. Individuals both create and shape society, and the change occurring is
constant and ongoing. Social interactionists are interested in the patterns created by our interactions
and how this reality makes up our very existence.

Examples of Symbolic Interactionism

To better understand how those wearing this lens view reality, we can look at a specific example.
Imagine you have a sibling with whom you have had a rivalry your whole life. You see your sister as
having always received an unfair bias, getting what she wanted more than you have. You perceive
her as picking at your flaws when you interact or cutting you down in some way. All of these
experiences take place through a series of communications, social situations, and thoughts you
have about your sister.
Events will also be symbolic to you, representing more to you than the objective facts might suggest.
For instance, she receives a promotion with her company within a year of being hired. Since you
don't believe she has the skills for the job, you give the situation a particular meaning, specifically,
that it is unfair and that it is an example of how your sister always gets what she wants.
 Perhaps then your sister loses her job abruptly with no other job in sight and comes to you for
emotional support as she recovers from the loss. You and she grow closer as she expresses
appreciation for your help and solicits advice from you on how to move forward. Your role changes
from that of a critical onlooker who is jealous to one who is needed for support and compassion. The
loss of her job becomes an opportunity to connect with other aspects of who your sister is as a
person, rather than seeing her as your sister who has an unfair advantage in the world. You give
your sister a new meaning: that of a person in need of your support and perhaps not always as lucky
as you had thought.

The symbolic meaning we give to relationships can change over time

Symbolic interactionists would look at this series of events and note how your experiences and
interactions with your sister form your understanding of reality. Before she loses her job, you have
one version of reality in your mind. Symbolically, you see your sister as having an unfair advantage
in the world and hold this idea in your mind. When the dynamic shifts and you play a role of
supporting her in a time of need, the meaning you give your sister's life fluctuates, changes, and
develops. All of this is based on the social interactions you have, the language used to
communicate, and the symbolic meaning you give to these events and thoughts

 Export Citations

 Cite

 Print

 Email

Symbolic Interactionism
Gary Fine, Kent Sandstrom
 LAST REVIEWED: 09 SEPTEMBER 2014
 LAST MODIFIED: 27 JULY 2011
 DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199756384-0061

Introduction
While the history of symbolic interactionism stretches back through the 20th century, it emerged as a prominent
theoretical perspective in American sociology during the 1960s. Currently most undergraduate
sociology textbooks highlight this perspective, along with functionalism and conflict theory, as one of the three
distinctive models for understanding social life. In contrast to functionalism and conflict theory, symbolic
interactionism emphasizes the micro-processes through which people construct meanings, identities, and joint acts.
In doing so it accentuates how symbols, interaction, and human agency serve as the cornerstones of social life.
Symbolic interactionism grew out of the American philosophical tradition of pragmatism in the late 19th century,
especially as elaborated by William James, John Dewey, and Charles S. Peirce. The most important bridge between
the pragmatic tradition and sociology was George Herbert Mead. One of his most famous books, Mind, Self, and
Society (see Classic Works and Original Statements) is often taken as a charter for the symbolic interactionist
approach. Along with Mead, two other important early sociologists who shaped the interactionist tradition were
Charles Horton Cooley and William Isaac Thomas. The most influential contributor to the symbolic interactionist
tradition was Herbert Blumer, who coined the perspective’s label in 1937. Blumer’s book, Symbolic
Interactionism (see Classic Works and Original Statements) serves as another foundational work for the perspective.
Symbolic interactionism had its most significant impact on sociology between 1950 and 1985. In challenging
functionalism, the dominant sociological paradigm of the 1950s, interactionists urged their colleagues to examine how
people “do social life”—that is, how they construct and negotiate meanings, order, and identities in their everyday
interactions. Interactionists stressed that sociologists could best understand social life’s core features by taking the
role of the individuals or groups they were studying, particularly by engaging in participant observation. By the 1980s
mainstream sociology had accepted much of the core of the symbolic interactionist approach, with its emphases on
meaning, agency, and the interpretive analysis of interactional processes, as a legitimate and central part of the
discipline. Thus, interactionism no longer represented a distinctive oppositional perspective as it had previously. In
recent decades interactionism has grown in a number of new directions. With respect to methodology, its approach
has broadened to include contextualized discourse analysis, ethnographic observation, content analysis, textual
analysis, performance studies, and autoethnography. Interactionism has also become a more prominent perspective
in a diverse array of disciplines.

History and Overviews

Scholars interested in interactionism have often reflected upon and debated about the origins, evolution, and future
directions of this perspective. For instance, in the late 1970s McPhail and Rexroat crafted an influential and
controversial assessment of Herbert Blumer’s role in translating George Herbert Mead into sociology (McPhail and
Rexroat 1979). In a related vein, Lewis and Smith 1981 proposes that the links between pragmatist philosophy,
Mead’s social behaviorism, and the symbolic interactionist perspective were less direct than Blumer claimed. Shalin
1986 offers a detailed analysis of the connections between pragmatism, Mead, and interactionist theory, concluding
that they were closely tethered. Fine 1993 examines the shifts that took place in symbolic interactionism from the
1970s to 1990s, highlighting the processes that led to these changes. Sandstrom, et al. 2001 builds upon Fine’s
earlier observations while also taking stock of symbolic interactionism’s place within social theory at the end of the
20th century. Finally, Maines 2001 is a critical analysis of the relationship between interactionism and mainstream
sociology, highlighting how sociologists are often unaware of interactionism’s contributions to social theory.

 Fine, Gary Alan. 1993. The sad demise, mysterious disappearance, and glorious triumph of

The Ideas Of George Herbert Mead

Date: September 16, 2016Author: Wanna Be0 Comments
This is a summary of an article from a book called Modern Sociology Theory: Modern
Schools.
George Herbert Mead is fairly well known among most sociologist or social scientists in
general. Here is a summary of his most popular theories regarding society and the self.

George Herbert Mead writer of Mind,

Self, and Society

Unlike many traditional social psychological who believes that the formation of the self
precedes social interaction Herbert mead believes that it is in fact the other way around.
The social world, and thus social interaction, comes before and also the reason why the
self is formed. Hence, it is by understanding the social world that we can ever hope to
analyze individual behaviors composing it.

To Mead, the whole is prior to the part and it is because of the social groups that self-
conscious mental state develops. Mead incorporates Behaviouralist perspective in his
theory focusing on social behavior. He is interested in the similarities on the behavior of
human and non-human and would compare the two to clarify his point later on.
I. What is the Act?
According to him, the Act, which is composed by the stimulus and the response, is
the most primitive unit in his theory. He clarifies that while the stimuli causes the
response, it is merely an opportunity to act and not a mandate or a compulsion.
He enumerates four basic and interrelated stages of the Act representing
an organic whole believing that this is in our nature and thus develops naturally. While
these are presented in a linear manner, Mead recognizes a dialectical relationship among
the stages where different stages can interpenetrate each other. The last stage can cause
the occurrence of the earlier ones and vice versa.
I.a Impulse
Impulse is an immediate sensuous stimulation which also includes the actors need to do
something about it.

I.b Perception
Perception represents the second stage in which the actor searches and reacts to the
stimuli. This is the stage where the person assesses a set of stimuli and chooses which to
react to and which to ignore. Also, Mead does not separate people from objects.
According to him, it is the act of perceiving that makes an object an object to a person
and so perception and objects are naturally linked.

I.c Manipulation
The third stage of the act is the manipulation. This represents a temporary pause in the
process of reaction while the person manipulates the object or his perception to figure out
the best course of action. This process allows human to contemplate various response
toward a stimuli. Animals lack this ability to examine and foresee future outcomes of
different action and they rely on trial-and-error methods instead.

I.d Consumption
The last stage of the Act is the Consumption or the taking of action. This is where the
person does and does not do anything to satisfy the original impulse.

II. What are Gestures? Insignificant vs

Significant
While the Act involves only a person and stimuli, Gesture involves at least two people.
Mead describes gesture as the reaction of the 1st organism to the stimuli produced the by
2nd organism. Both lower animals and human are capable of gestures where in action of
one individual becomes a stimulus and elicits an automatic reaction from the other
individual. Mead calls this the “conversation of gestures”.
This instinctive, mindless response is labeled by Mead as insignificant gestures.
What distinguishes human from animals is their ability for “significant gestures” which
requires thought before action.
Mead focuses on the importance of vocal gestures. While animals and human alike can
create insignificant vocals, it is the development of vocal gestures that becomes the most
important factor in making distinctive development of human life. This particularly
shows the specialization of humans within the field of gestures which is seen as the
origin and growth of present human society and knowledge.
How? First, unlike gestures which remain invisible to us, we can hear our own words
which also affect us a speaker. Second, we are more able to control our vocal gestures
than our physical gestures. This strengthens our self-control. Third, vocal gestures, such
as language, provide a medium for the creation of social organization in society, which as
mentioned earlier, develops the self.

II.a Significant Gestures

Significant gesture takes a central role in Mead’s thinking. He believes this is the kind of
gestures that only human can make thus separating us from lower animals. While
physical gestures can be gestures too, their effect are too limiting because we cannot see
or hear our physical gestures. I will explain later one.
Vocal gestures allow us to hear ourselves and words automatically elicit response and
serves as a stimulus. For example, hearing the word “fire!” elicit bigger response
compared to a grimace.

Mead also looks at the “function of gestures”.

First, vocal gestures have better ability to make adjustment possible by using references
to objects concerning act. Although vocal gestures are also used with physical gestures,
vocal gestures are easier to control thus making conscious adjustment easier. Think of an
angry man who is unconscious of his body language but is conscious of his words,
because he can hear it, and so keeps quite in order to adjust to the next action or change
in environment.
Second, they make mind, mental process, and so on possible. Mead describes thinking
as an internalized communication with oneself. Without vocal gestures, thinking would
not be possible. This is a behaviouralist definition of thinking.
Third, but probably not lastly, it makes symbolic interaction possible. While people are
able to interact through physical gestures, vocal gestures make interactions more complex
creating organization or even institutions.

III. How did Mead view mental processes

and the mind?
First we must define what Mead meant by Intelligence, Consciousness, Meaning, Mind,
Self, Stages of Child Development, Generalized Others, I, Me, and Society. By linking
the definition and seeing how they fit with one another, we will have a better grasp on
Mead’s theory.

III.a Intelligence
Intelligence is the mutual adjustment of acts of organisms. By this definition, animals
have intelligence because they too can adapt to the one another. What distinguishes
human is their ability to mutually adopt using significant symbols. Animals
have unreasoning intelligence while humans have reasoning intelligence. Like thinking,
reasoning is indicating to yourselfcertain characteristics that call out certain responses.
Thus we are able to manipulate and delay our reaction, which Mead thinks is crucial to
the reflective intelligence of humans. With this, we can organize thoughts and analyze
alternative ways of completing a social act. We can also foresee how different actions by
testing them mentally without any risk of social cost. While animals, as previously
mentioned, do this by trial-and-error.

Lastly, we are able to select specific stimulus out of many instead of just acting on the
first or the strongest stimulus whereas animals merely act.

III.b Consciousness
Mead divides consciousness into two categories. First is the awareness that only the actor
has access to. The second, which he concentrated more on, is the consciousness that
involves reflective intelligence.

Consciousness is located not in the brain but in the social process. Mead sees
consciousness as belonging to the objective world and a characteristic of the environment
in which we find ourselves in .What happens in the brain is not consciousness but a
psychological process wherein we either loss or gain consciousness.

Similarly, Mead refuses to place mental images in the brain. Mental images are memories
we have of objects therefore they belong to the environment.

III.c Meaning
Mead, as usual, has behaviouralist take on the concept of meaning. According to him, it
is not found in the consciousness nor is it a physical phenomenon or even idea. It lies
within social act. “Meaning is what arises within the field of relation between gestures”
among human organism. If a gesture shows the next or the resulting of the other person,
then it has meaning. It is the adjustive response of the second organism that gives
meaning to the gesture of the first organism. Meaning then is shown in the behavior of
the people involve.

III.d Mind
Mind is a process, not a thing, of inner conversation with oneself. It is not found within
the individual but is a social phenomenon. The social process is not a product of the
mind; in fact it precedes and causes it to exist. The distinctive characteristic of the mind
is the ability of the individual to summon not just a single response but to call out, due to
previous social encounters, the response of the whole community. If one can act with a
certain organized response, then that person has the mind. In a pragmatic point of view,
Mead also points out how the mind is involved in problem solving processes. To
summarize, mind has the “ability to respond to overall community”, “put forth an
organized response”, and “is used in problem solving processes”.
III.e Self
Self is basically the ability to take oneself as an object. The self, like most of his theories,
presupposes or depends on social process. The self arises through social activities and
social relationship. Without any these social experiences, the self cannot exist.

Self is dialectically related to the mind. The self, which is not found in the body, cannot
exist without the mind. On the other hand, the self is also essential to the development of
the mind.

Mead, like always, refuses to embed self in the brain and takes a behaviouralist view of
the self. When a person responds to an stimuli, the conduct of the person, his response,
becomes a part of who he is. During this process, as previously discussed, he talks,
replies, and responds to himself like he is another person analyzing and deciding his
behavior in which he becomes an object to himself. The self is seen as a social process
and simply another aspect of an overall process where in the individual is part of.
The general mechanism for the development of self is its reflexivity or the ability of an
individual to distance himself allowing the individual to reflect on and examine himself
as an object. It is by this reflexiveness is the individual able to adjust himself to any given
social acts. The self allows the individual to take part of a conversation, giving him
awareness on how to conduct himself and what to say.

However, people cannot directly experience themselves. They need to distance their mind
and put themselves on the views of other so they can view themselves.

IV. Child Development.

Mead formulates a theory on the creation of the self.

1. Play Stage
Learning to take in or imitate attitudes and behaviors of other

2. Game Stag

Development of the self in full terms. In here, the child must take in the role of everyone
else in the game to figure out where he stands. The self does not just imbibe one
individual but can have 4-5 individual present in current attitude. In this stage, the child
begins to develop his own role and is able to function in a group.

3. Generalized others

The generalized other is the general attitude of all the members of community or a social
group, which is incorporated by the individual to in order to develop his complete self-
development. This occurs because, self as discussed previously, arises through social
interactions when he begins to be an object to himself who monitors the way he talks and
act within a social group.
So, to have a self, one must be a member of a community that is directed by the attitudes
common among that community. Since the individual try to live up to the groups
expectation, he will regularly try to distance and monitor himself in order to act
according to what is expected of him. This is why the self is seen as crucial to the
development of organized group activities because it allows for more efficient group
members.

This does not mean the self is nothing but conformists. While the self share a common
structure with the community, it has its unique biography articulation. Besides that,
people have also many generalized others as well as multiple selves.

Since Mead believes that social science should help in social reform, the self is not
completely at the mercy of the community. In order for the self to be able to change the
community, he needs to set a higher sort of community compared to the current
generalize others, that is composed of parts from the past and from the future.

I have two interpretations for this statement. He might be referring to either people from
the past and the future, or cultures of the past and what he attains to have. Maybe both.

V. I and Me
The “I” is the creative and unpredictable immediate response of an individual to the
others. We are never truly aware of our I and even surprise us every now and then. We
only know I after the act has been carried out.

The I is important for four reasons enumerated by Mead. It is:

1. Key source of novelty in the social process

2. Most important values are located

3. Realization of self

4. Permits us to develop ‘definite personality’

5. Primitive society dominated by ‘me’, modern societies by ‘I’

The ‘I” is dynamic and creative and without it, individuals would totally be dominated by
external and internal control. It is the I that makes changes possible. While the individual
is a mixture of I and Me, great historical figures are seen to have greater I. Since I is free
and Me is socially restricted, tension between them arises.

The Me is the conventional and habitual. It is the conformist and it is through it that the
society is able to dominate the individual. In a pragmatic point of view however, “me”
allows the individual to live comfortably in the social world while the “I” makes changes
in society possible. These two help balance the flow of society helping it function more
efficiently.

VI. Society
Society is defined as the ongoing social process that comes prior the mind and the self. If
you’ve been with me up until know, you’ll realize that Mead highlights its influence in
shaping and creating the mind and the self. The Society represents organized set of
responses taken over by the “me” form. So individuals do not live in society, individuals
carry society with them through self criticism that controls their attitudes and behavior.
A critique on Mead’s work though is how underdeveloped his macrostructure, society,
compared to his microstructure. He focuses on microstructure such as social institutions
thought and defines it as “the common response” in the community or the “life habits of
the community”.
When the whole community acts toward the individual in identical
response, institution is formed. An institution such as Education is the process
of internalizing the habit of community in the actor. This is an essential process since
Mead does not consider one to have a self unless he is a member of a community who
can respond to himself as the larger community does.
While Mead recognizes the oppressiveness, stereotypical and ultra conservative nature of
institutions, he believes that there is no reason why institution could instead be flexible or
progressive one that encourages individuality instead. While Mead has little to say about
society, he nevertheless believes in the notion of emergence of that the whole is merely
the sum of all its parts.
He believed that the combination of parts could create something new.

ymbolic Interactionism: Work

of Goffman

Date: September 18, 2016Author: Wanna Be0 Comments

Many symbolic interactionalist have their own distinct versions of the theory. These
however are its most basic principles:

1. Unlike animals, human being are endowed with capacity for thought

2. This capacity for thought is shaped by social interactions

3. In social interactions, people learn symbols and meanings that allows them to
exercise their capacity for thought

4. Meaning and symbols allow people to carry out human actions

5. People are able to modify and alter meanings and symbols within context

6. People are able to modify and alter meaning and symbols because of their ability to
interact with themselves and assessing different course of actions

7. Group and societies are made up of intertwined action and interaction

II. Capacity for Thought

One of the major contributions of early symbolic interactionalists is the assumption of the
human capacity for thought. To symbolic interactionalists such as Cooley, Thomas,
Dewey and Mead; individuals where not motivation by external or internal factors
beyond their control, rather they were seen as reflective and interacting units
compromising society.

III. Action and Interaction

Symbolic Interactionist’s primary concern is the impact of symbols and meaning to

human reaction and interaction. Mead differentiates two kinds of behavior. Covert
Behavior is the thinking process involving symbol and meaning. Overt Behavior is the
actual, observable actions of people. Mostly influenced by behaviouralism, overt actions
are the primary concern of most symbolic interactionists.

Symbols and meanings are what sets human interaction apart with that of lower animals.
Human interaction is the communication of symbols and mutual interpretations of
meaning. This creates a process of mutual influence.

III. Making Choices

People can handle meaning and symbols but are not mandated to accept the meaning
imposed to them. This is because humans have the ability to form new meanings or new
line of meanings. Symbolic Interactionalist give actors some autonomy to change and
construct their own society.

W.I. Thomas and Dorothy Thomas says that most definition of situation have already
been provided to us. They view the family and community as the source of social
definitions. However, they emphasize that individuals are also capable of “spontaneous”
definition of situation where people modify and change meaning.

Gary Fine and Sherryl Kleinman also defines social network, not as a constraining and
unconscious social structure but a “set of social relationship” with meaning and symbol
endowed by the people.
The Self and The Work of Erving
Goffman
Goffman defines self as the center in which all social process revolves around. To better
understand, we must look into Charles Horton Cooley’s ‘looking-glass’ idea. According
to him, the self is formed by:

1. Imagining how we appear to others

2. Imagine what their judgement about our appearance is

3. React or response to this

Cooley and Meads theory were important in the development of Symbolic Interactionist
as a theory. Blumer is simple in his definition of self. Self, by blumer, simply means that
human is able to be an object of his own action.Meaning his action and behavior towards
other are based on how he views himself. Self here is seen as a social process and not a
thing.

Erving Goffman

However, Blumer also made it clear that the self acts and not just response. This is
possible when the actor chooses the stimulus he wants to act on. Second, by
communicating with himself, he is able to check, categorize, and transform meaning
within the context he is in.

I. The Work Of Erving Goffman

In his work, the Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Goffman discusses the tension
between the spontaneous I and the socially constrained Me created when what we want
does not agree with what other people wants to do. Furthermore, our Me must not waver
and we thrive to construct a stable, consistent self in front our audiences. This results to
what Goffman calls dramaturgy or viewing the social life as a series of dramatic
performances like actors on stages.
The concept of dramaturgy is the center of Goffman’s theory of self. According to him,
in order to examine the self, one must distance himself away from the person for he is
only the ‘peg’ where in collaborative manufacture will be hung for a time. Producing and
maintaining selves do not reside in the person. The self is not owned by the actor but a
product of dramatic interactions arising from individual interactions driven by the desire
to be accepted by others. The actor wants the audience to perceive him as he wants to be
seen.

The self however is vulnerable to stage disruption which is why the actor also strives to
control the audience in hopes of them playing the part the actors want them to. Goffman
calls this ‘Impression Management’. This involves series to technique to remain ‘in
character in’ during stage disruptions.
In an individual’s dramaturgy, Goffman speaks of the front stage. This is the part of the
performance that is observable to the audience. Within the front stage, there is the setting,
which refers to the physical environment, and the personal front, or the performance
props that character identifies with. The Personal front is also divided into two.
The appearance, which includes social status, clothing, and the manner is the attitude or
behavior that tells the role the performer is expected to play.
 Front Stage

o Setting

o Personal Front

 Appearance

 Manner
 Backstage

 Outside

While Goffman took a symbolic approach in his system, he did review the structural
aspect of it. He argued that the front tends to be institutionalized and so most of the time,
the front is already constructed. In this case, the actor does not create the front but selects
it.

People usually want to present the idealized version of them to avoid any stage
disruption and so they conceal errors, show the result and but not the process, hide their
‘dirty works’ or let their moral, ethical, religious standard slide
Actors often times try to convey the impression of closeness to their audience. In order
to make them feel special and for the trick not to be revealed, they isolate the audience.
Sometimes the audience themselves would try to ride along even when the actor slips.
Success of performance after all, depends on the involvement of the parties or what
Goffman calls the team. These are sets of individuals who cooperate in staging a routines.
Another technique used by performer is mystification. Actors try to create mystery by
distancing themselves to audience.
The backstage is where all the suppressed, informal actions reside. These are usually
hidden from the audiences. Then there’s the third domain, the outside.
II. Impression Management

Impression management is used to guard against stage disruption or any unpredictable

disturbances in action. Goffman presents us with three solutions:

1. Producing Dramaturgical loyalty: foster high in group loyalty, changing the audience

2. Dramaturgical discipline: presence of mind, self-control

3. Dramaturgical circumspection: planning the selection of audiences etc.

III. Role Distance

Goffman is confronted with the question on how much one embraces his role. Role
distancing deals with the degree of separation on the role. This can be done by doing a
certain role haphazardly. One usually does this to fit in. For example a sociologist might
laugh at jokes that she might not particularly find accurate.

IV. Stigma

The gap between “virtual social identity” what the person is supposed to be
versus “actual social identity” what he actually is stigmatized. Stigma focuses on the
interaction of the stigmatized and the norms. Discreditable stigma is one in which the
difference is not known by the audience and hidden by the actor. To someone with this
kind of stigma, the key relies on impression management.
Goffman points out that we, at some points in our life, have been stigmatized in one
setting or another.

V. Basic Presuppositions

Manning defines four “interactional processes that constrains face-to-face interaction”

1. Interactant should display situational property: practical knowledge on how to act

during social situations

2. Interactant should display appropriate level of involvement

3. Interactant must display appropriate level of civil inattention: balance of

acknowledging stranger and giving them privacy

4. Interactant must be accessible to others

5. Frame Analysis

VI. Frame Analysis

For Goffman, action is defined more as our adherence to law than spontaneous creative
action. He tried to look beyond everyday interaction to uncover the invisible laws that
govern them. These are the “schemata of interpretation” that allows individual “to
locate, perceive, identify, and label” social occurrences. By framing social interactions,
we are able to categorize and organize them into something meaningful.
Frames are the “principles of organization that defines our experiences”. They are our
assumptions about what we are seeing in the social world. Without frames, life would be
series of unrelated, chaotic events.

Frames are not random occurrence. They are composed of essential systematized
components with stable relationships and definite arrangements. To Gonos, frames are
largely laws that fix interaction. They are often unconscious and nonnegotiable. It defines
how signs and symbols should be interpreted and what actions would accompany an
experience. Gondos brings to light the importance of ritual. According to him, these are
essential in maintaining confidence and legitimacy in basic social relationships. It is a
placement mechanism that integrates hierarchy of social actions. The degree of ritual also
reflects the respect one has for the role he occupies.

Goffman acknowledges the limitation of theater as a metaphor for life. He also points out
the limitation of Durkhiemian idea that roles are constraints and argued that there are
moments when rules are ignored and do not stop variation and diversity among people.

VII. Group and Societies

 Herbert Blumer

Most Symbolic Interactionists are highly critical on how other sociologist focus on macro
structure, often neglecting the microstructure or society. However, most sociologist also
criticizes how Symbolic Interactionalists often disregard macro sociological thought as
overambitious.

Dmitri Shalin writes that while Symbolic Interactionalist does not completely shun the
study of macrostructures, they concentrate more on the activity and processes found in
minor places.

Unlike sociologist that believes in social determinism, symbolic interactionalist shun the
idea that an individual is merely the product of society and are ‘mindless robots’ to
society expectations.

To Blumer, society is not made up of macro structures. Its essence is found in actors and
actions. He writes that human society is action made up of collective actions of people
with fitting reactions to one another. This gives rise to what Mead calls the social act or
Blumer’s joint action.
Blumer accepts the idea of emergence or how large scale structures emerge from small
processes. This possible through joint action, the sum total of all individuals act that
 would later come to have a character on its own. For Blumer, macro-structures are not
external or coercive of actors and their action; it is created by actors and their actions.

Joint action is very flexible. That is, Blumer believe that society can become what the
people wants it to be. However he concede that society occurs in patterns and are often
limited by cultural meaning. To Mead and Blumer, while structures are important, they
have extremely limited role in symbolic interactionism because they are nothing but
frameworks that wherein important interaction takes place. Large scale structure set
condition and limitations, shape situations and supply’s actors with symbol BUT they do
not determine them.

To quote Blumer, “It is the social process in group life that creates and uphold riles, not
the rules that create and uphold group life”.

Understanding Functionalist Theory

One of the Major Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology
 Share
 Flipboard
 Email
PRINT

The Careful Balance of Functionalist Theory. Illustration by Hugo Lin. ThoughtCo.

Social Sciences
 Sociology
o Key Concepts
o Major Sociologists
o Deviance & Crime
o News & Issues
o Research, Samples, and Statistics
o Recommended Reading
 Psychology
 Archaeology
 Economics
 Environment
 Ergonomics
 Maritime
byAshley Crossman
Updated November 18, 2019

The functionalist perspective, also called functionalism, is one of the

major theoretical perspectives in sociology. It has its origins in the works of Emile
Durkheim, who was especially interested in how social order is possible or how
society remains relatively stable. As such, it is a theory that focuses on the macro-
level of social structure, rather than the micro-level of everyday life. Notable
theorists include Herbert Spencer, Talcott Parsons, and Robert K. Merton.

Emile Durkheim

"The totality of beliefs and sentiments common to the average members of a

society forms a determinate system with a life of its own. It can be termed the
collective or creative consciousness." The Division of Labour (1893)

Theory Overview
Functionalism posits that society is more than the sum of its parts; rather, each
aspect of it works for the stability of the whole. Durkheim envisioned society as
an organism since each component plays a necessary role but can't function
alone. When one part experiences a crisis, others must adapt to fill the void in
some way.

In functionalist theory, the different parts of society are primarily composed of

social institutions, each designed to fill different needs. Family, government,
economy, media, education, and religion are important to understanding this
theory and the core institutions that define sociology. According to functionalism,
an institution only exists because it serves a vital role in the functioning of
society. If it no longer serves a role, an institution will die away. When new needs
evolve or emerge, new institutions will be created to meet them.

In many societies, the government provides education for the children of the
family, which in turn pays taxes the state depends on to keep running. The family
relies on the school to help children grow up to have good jobs so they can raise
and support their own families. In the process, the children become law-abiding,
taxpaying citizens who support the state. From the functionalist perspective, if all
goes well, the parts of society produce order, stability, and productivity. If all does
not go well, the parts of society must adapt to produce new forms of order,
stability, and productivity.
Functionalism emphasizes the consensus and order that exist in society, focusing
on social stability and shared public values. From this perspective,
disorganization in the system, such as deviant behavior, leads to change because
societal components must adjust to achieve stability. When one part of the
system is dysfunctional, it affects all other parts and creates social problems,
prompting social change.

Functionalist Perspective in American Sociology

The functionalist perspective achieved its greatest popularity among American
sociologists in the 1940s and 50s. While European functionalists originally
focused on explaining the inner workings of social order, American functionalists
focused on discovering the purpose of human behavior. Among these American
functionalist sociologists was Robert K. Merton, who divided human functions
into two types: manifest functions, which are intentional and obvious, and latent
functions, which are unintentional and not obvious.

The manifest function of attending a place of worship, for instance, is to practice

one's faith as part of a religious community. However, its latent function may be
to help followers learn to discern personal values from institutional ones. With
common sense, manifest functions become easily apparent. Yet this is not
necessarily the case for latent functions, which often demand a sociological
approach to be revealed.

Antonio Gramsci. Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Critiques of the Theory

Many sociologists have critiqued functionalism because of its neglect of the often
negative implications of social order. Some critics, like Italian theorist Antonio
Gramsci, claim that the perspective justifies the status quo and the process of
cultural hegemony that maintains it.

Functionalism does not encourage people to take an active role in changing their
social environment, even when doing so may benefit them. Instead,
functionalism sees agitating for social change as undesirable because the various
parts of society will compensate in a seemingly organic way for any problems that
may arise.

Updated by Nicki Lisa Cole, Ph.D.