Symbolic Interactionism

Conceptual Overview

Symbolic interactionism is a broad perspective deeply rooted in the North American sociological tradition. Action approaches, of which symbolic interactionism is a particularly important example, focus on social interaction rather than the structure of the organization or society in which the social interactions occur. They point to the connection between actions, interactions, and meanings and argue that people choose, [Page 1499]interpret, and intend their actions rather than simply reacting to external constraints or stimuli. Society is recognized as being built up from these interactions, although individuals are still seen as being constrained by the social processes that emanate from social structure. Symbolic interactionism emphasizes the individual, rather than the structure of the society or the organization within which people act. In doing so, it retains a profoundly humanist perspective and avoids reducing people to sterile numbers for analysis.

In fact, in many ways symbolic interactionism can be seen as a reaction to the structural functionalists, such as Parsons, who dominated Anglo-American sociology in the 1950s and 1960s. Unlike symbolic interactionism, structuralist approaches encourage a view of people as “effects” or “reflections” of the surrounding system. Symbolic interactionists reject this view. They argue that the term structure tends to neglect the meanings that are central to people's lives, color their relationships, and impact on institutions and organizations.

Furthermore, symbolic interactionists argue that structure is an unnecessary abstraction. If we wish to understand human behavior, we need to closely study microlevel social activity and face-to-face relationships. Symbolic interactionists conclude that social life is constructed by individuals themselves, in their interactions with others, and not produced by structures existing externally from their experience.

Mead is generally regarded as the founder of symbolic interactionism. His ideas on social behaviorism were published posthumously in the volume Mind, Self, and Society in 1934. In this work, Mead argues against the idea that people mechanically respond to external stimuli, contending that it is possible to build up an account of the development of the self through the observation of ordinary activities in daily life. For Mead, people in everyday situations respond to social stimuli by reflecting on what the stimuli mean and by selecting a course of action they consider appropriate.

In Mead's work, the two key ideas are the centrality of social meaning and the fact that we commonly reflect on how others see us (this latter activity also functions as the link between individuals and society). It is through the mind and the self that people interact with others and relate to the social habits, culture, and customs of their society, organization, or group. Thus, an individual's self is not necessarily an internalized construct, but a product of social processes and activities. Mead proposed that individuals hold internal conversations when thinking something through, reflecting on how they look to others, and anticipating their reaction. This concept of a “generalized other” is achieved through communication and interaction with others, which allows us to learn how others see things and what is expected in particular situations.

...