Symbolic Interactionism

❑Learning Objectives:
At the end of the lesson, the students will be able
to:
• Define symbolic interactionism.
• Differentiate the three schools of symbolic
interactionism.
• Identify how symbols and language exert power
over individuals and society.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• Symbolic interactionism is a sociological framework that focuses on the
different meanings individuals attach to objects, peoples, and
interactions as well as the corresponding behaviors that reflect those
meanings and/or interpretations.
• It is a framework that actualizes the nature of humans to make sense of
their actions and interactions through external cues from their everyday
life and environment (Vejar 2015).
• George Herbert Mead was an influential figure in the field of symbolic
interactionism. Gestures, according to him, are important in
communication.
• When we interact with others, our posture, tone of voice, voice
inflections, as well as hand and facial movements convey significance.
They can either accentuate or contradict that which we are verbally
stating (Vejar 2015).
George Herbert Mead – 1863 - 1931
 Symbolic Interactionism
• Mead's central concept is the self, "the part of an individual's
personality composed of self-awareness and self-image"
(Macionis 2007, 124).
• The process of self-discovery or self-development is enacted
by the usage of gestures threefold through the play stage,
the game stage, and through a stage called generalized other.
• The term "generalized other" refers to "widespread cultural
norms and values we use as a reference in evaluating
ourselves" (Macionis 2007, 126). Verja (2015, 3—4) describes
each stage.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• In the play stage, young children identify with key figures in
their environments, such as the mother or father, as well as
occupational or gender-specific roles to which they have
been exposed (e.g., police officer, nurse) and replicate the
behavioral norms that correspond with such roles.
• A young boy might sit on the edge of the bathroom counter,
attentive to the way in which his father goes about shaving,
and emulate this action by scraping the edge of a blunt
object across his own face.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• During the game stage, children extrapolate from the vantage point of
the roles they have simulated by assuming the roles that their
counterparts concurrently undertake.
• While engaging in a team sport, for example, it behooves a child to
conceptualize the roles of his teammates and opponents in order to
successfully maneuver throughout the game within his own particular
position.
• As people developmentally evolve, their anticipation of the generalized
other helps them construct morally sound and appropriate behavior,
such as the employee who arrives promptly to work in order to avoid
scrutiny from his colleagues. Moreover, self identity continuously
fluctuates between the l, which is the impulsive, automatic, "knee-
jerk" responses we have to stimuli (Lane, 1984), and the me, which is
the socially refined reactions that were instilled through the process of
adopting social standards. (Baldwin, 1988)
 Symbolic Interactionism
• Symbolic interactionism emerged in the mid-20th century with
influences from Scottish moralists and American pragmatist
philosophers. Its greatest influence came from American philosopher
George Herbert Mead and his theories about the relationship of the
self and society (Carter and Fuller, 2015: 1). Symbolic Interactionism
is a micro-level framework and perspective in sociology that is also a
reaction to the positivist way of looking into society and social
research. It abandoned the positivist "top-down" method of
examining the impact of macro-level institutions and structures on
individual behavior and it emphasized a "bottom-up" approach
where the focus turned to face-to-face encounters and everyday
relations to explain the operations of society.
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Ideas and Methods
• The basic concepts of symbolic interactionism are: symbols are images
that represent a meaning; signs are things that may represent something
else, and may signify an event or another thing (e.g., morning sickness is
a sign of pregnancy); objects are anything to which attention can be paid
and action can be directed, which may be tangible and intangible (e.g.,
listening to music); language is the socially constructed and organized
system of symbols used to express meaning; acts refer to the interplay of
internal processes and external manifestations that are made evident by
human behavior. Humans interact using these symbols, signs, and
language (Hewitt, 2002: 1-7).
• The three theoretical traditions of symbolic interactionism can be traced
to three American sociologists, namely Herbert Blumer of the Chicago
school, Manford Kuhn of the Iowa school, and Sheldon Stryker of the
Indiana School.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• In the 1950s, Herbert Blumer developed his perspective on symbolic
interactionism by bringing Herbert Mead's philosophically-based
social behaviorism to sociology. He emphasized the active role of
humans engaging in mindful actions where they change symbols and
meanings of situations. Studying human behavior must therefore
begin with human interactions and behavioral patterns. And these
patterns must be studied in terms of what humans do together in
groups. Social institutions, then, are considered as "social habits"
and not fixed structures that dictate human behavior. Institutions
such as culture are perceived to be fluid and dynamic depending on
how meaning is reinterpreted and how it is conveyed in human
interactions.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• The three main premises of Blumer’s symbolic interactionalism are
(Carter and Fuller, 2015: 2-3):
• 1. Human beings act toward objects or persons based on the meanings
that the objects or persons have for them. This is a behaviorist view of
human beings wherein certain negative and positive stimuli from the
environment might elicit certain attitudes.
• 2. The meaning of things or persons, on the other hand, is derived from
or arises out of the social interactions that one has with others. So,
whether an object or a person has a negative or a positive meaning is
ultimately determined by the individual's interactions with the group.
• For example, Filipinos have numerous superstitious beliefs that assign
different meanings to objects, animals, activities, and people, black cats
bring bad luck while round objects bring good luck especially during New
Year' Eve.
• These beliefs or meanings reach other members through individual and
group encounters.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• 3. Meanings are handled and modified through an interpretative process
used by a person in dealing with the things that they encounter. This is
where the agency of an individual comes in.
• Agency is a sociological concept that refers to ability of human beings to
evaluate options and choose the most appropriate option for his/her
well-being.
• Interactions with other individuals and groups may present an individual
with various layers of meaning but the individual may or may not choose
to accept the meanings being presented to him through his/her own
personal evaluations.
• For instance, through the cyberspace, individuals continuously interact
with people from different websites and groups. At the end of the day,
however, the individual has the final say on what idea to adhere to. Some
individuals are easily manipulated by online groups who proliferate fake
news.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• Expanded versions of Blumer's theory can be seen in other scholars such
as D.A Snow (2001). Snow adds four principles to symbolic
interactionism, namely: the principle of interactive determination which
is the assignment of meaning through various layers of interactions; the
principle of symbolization which is the process of translating meaning to
language and symbols; the principle of emergence which is the
institutionalization and sharing of these meanings through symbols; and
the principle of agency which takes into account the third premise of
Blumer's symbolic interactionism.
• In terms of methodology, Blumer emphasized qualitative and in-depth
interviews with individuals to examine how certain people define and
describe the world. This also helps interviewers become intimate with
the people in their research through the different interactions and
relations they can form. This is where the Iowa and Indiana Schools of
Kuhn and Stryker come in.
 Symbolic Interactionism
• Manford Kuhn and Sheldon Stryker, of the Iowa and Indiana school
respectively, does not share the premises of Blumer. Kuhn believes
that quantitative and positivist methods can still produce substantial
results for symbolic interactionist research. Kuhn emphasized four
core themes in his theory: social interaction can be examined
through a cybernetic perspective; studying society can be done by
focusing on dyads and triads as the location for most social behavior
and interaction; society can also be studied in its natural form,
focusing on how interactions are naturally done in society, or it can
also be recreated in a laboratory with the purpose of identifying
patterns and establishing laws; and social scientists must endeavor
to create a more systematic and rigorous vocabulary to refer to the
nature of sociality (Carter and 2015: 3-5).
 Symbolic Interactionism
• Stryker, on the other 'hand, believes that structures still play a significant
role in studying human behavior. He emphasized that meanings and
interactions eventually lead to the creation of stable patterns that
support social structures. To demonstrate the continuing effect of
structures on human behavior, he examined the process of role-taking in
society. He concluded that roles are expectations attached to positions or
symbolic categories that serve to cue behavior. An individual may rely on
symbolic cues from previous experiences and expectations of people
from different social positions to assess potential lines of action or role
that an individual is expected to play in various situations. A few
instances that depict symbolic cues include situations such as: a man may
subscribe to certain dress and communications codes when entering a
formal establishment; students should speak English at school; and
people should be able to know different market jargons to be able to
avail of cheaper market prices. Stryker points out reciprocity of human
behavior and interaction in society where individuals see themselves and
others in the context of numerous social structures.
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Applications in the Social Sciences
• Like phenomenology, post-structuralism, and feminism, symbolic
interactionism is a theory that attempted to move away from the
empirical and structural treatment of social phenomena and research by
highlighting the significance of human experience in constructing reality
through interactions using language, texts, signs, and symbols.
• This theory benefits researchers from the discipline of linguistics with its
emphasis on language. However, the study of language, texts, signs, and
symbols is also being done in different social science disciplines such as
history, human geography, anthropology, and, sociology. This shift in the
object of study of some theories and approaches came from the time of
the cultural turn wherein there was an emphasis on examining culture
and the bearers of culture and meaning.
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Varieties SI:
• As a theoretical perspective, symbolic interactionism is not known
for homogeneity, parsimony or consensus among its practitioners.
Four most prominent contemporary varieties of symbolic
interactionism include the Chicago School, the Iowa School, the
dramaturgical approach, and ethnomethodology. All these four
schools of thought or orientations share the view that human beings
construct their realities in a process of social interaction, and agree
on the methodological implication of such, that is, the necessity of
"getting inside" the reality of the actor in order to understand what
is going on (Gecas 1980, 1458).
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Varieties of SI:
• Nonetheless, the four varieties of symbolic interactionism differ
significantly in terms of purpose and methodology. The most glaring
difference exists between the Chicago School with a positivist
orientation and the Iowa School with a humanistic orientation. Such
difference reflects a basic divergence in purpose and methodology in the
discipline of Sociology (Gecas 1980).
• Following a positivist orientation and with Thomas Kuhn as its chief
progenitor, the Chicago School aims at prediction and unity of method
for all the sciences.
• Adopting a humanistic orientation, the Iowa school under the influence
of Herbert Blumer strives for understanding and a distinctive method for
sociology, one that is based on "sympathetic introspection."
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Varieties SI:
• The two other contemporary varieties of symbolic
interactionism, namely, Goffmants dramaturgical approach and
Garfinkel's ethnomethodology, are both more aligned with the positivist
Chicago School (Gecas 1980, 1458).
• Symbolic interaction has both "insider" "and outsider" critics. Insiders'
criticism focus on the method and the central concepts of symbolic
interactionism, particularly the ambiguity of major concepts used
particularly the concept of the "self." These criticisms attack the utility of
symbolic interactionism in the production of cumulative and
generalizable knowledge. Outsiders' critique, on the other hand,
highlights the structural bias in symbolic interactionism. This bias refers
to the claim that symbolic interactionism's perspective is historical,
noneconomic, and a limited view of social power and social organization
(Gecas 1980, 1459).
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Criticisms:
• The disagreement between the Chicago School and the Iowa School
reflects not only the positivist-humanistic debate in symbolic
interactionism, but by extension, the objectivist-subjectivist
dichotomy and debate not only in Sociology but also in the Social
Sciences.
• The debate between subjectivist (humanist) and objectivist
(positivist or neopositivist) orientations toward human behavior and
social processes is long-standing. The debate has been between
those who focus on the (humanistic) subject matter of the social
sciences and those who call for the same (scientific) method for all
the sciences, both natural and social. The debate has not only
divided each of the social sciences, it has also divided many of the
subfields within these sciences, subfields such as social psychology.
 Symbolic Interactionism
❑ Lesson Summary:
• Symbolic interactionism emerged in the mid-20th century with
influences from Scottish moralists and American pragmatist
philosophers. It is a micro-level framework and perspective in
sociology that is also a reaction to the positivist way of looking into
society and positivist social research that emphasized a "bottom-
up" approach where the focus shifted to face-to-face encounters
and everyday relations to explain the operations of society. The
main concepts in the study of symbolic interactionism are symbols,
signs, objects, language, and the interplay between these factors in
human behavior. The three theoretical traditions of symbolic
interactionism can be traced back to three American sociologists,
namely Herbert Blumer of the Chicago school, Manford Kuhn of the
Iowa school, and Sheldon Stryker of the Indiana School.