"a Symbolic Interactionism Perspective and Method enaeer aLuMen 67) CH ste m wut Fe lal a ths, nt emleoe lot Pparbe® Editon ivr of California Pres (118) Berkeley "LosAngeles London1 The Mcthodological Position of Symbolic Interactionism "The term “symboticiterationisn” has come into use a8 label for srelauvely distinctive approach to the study of human group ‘Mo and human conduct* “The scholars who have used © a ‘roach or contributed to its intellectual foundation are many, and Include such notable American Sigues as George Herbert Mend, John Dewey, W. Thomas, Robert E Park, Wil James, Cherag Marton Cociey, Florian Zaanicchi, James, Mark Baldwin, Robert Redicld, and Louis Wath, Despite sigoiScant diderences tn the thought of such scholars, there is'a gre smilaty fn the general ‘ay in which they viewed and studied human group hfe. The oo expt of symbolic interactionon i bull around this trand of gence) similarity, ‘There has been no clear formulation ofthe positon af symbolic interactions, and above al, a reasoned statement of the ‘methodological postion ofthis approach i lacking, This ey i effort to develop such a statement rely chielyon the thought of George Herbert Mead who, above all thers, lid the Foundations of the symbolic interactionist approach, but Ihave been compelled to develop my own version, dealing explicitly with many erueial mat. ters that were only implicit in the thought of Mead and others, and {ced on ind yo ade cee aes soe (earn Fh New Yo: Po Hal 90 he on soocoving ta ope with whch thy were et once, That tee mfr ne Pata al rprsy fore wr oa tah prone ere hoa te ey eo ‘etary the docuson of rope sly hy own By ‘ene ef weatment fet caine he nature ef ye te ston nxt ely he yg pin of abe i cee epi sce a fs dat spay imbibe poston yabole mianctine TE MATURE OF SYABOUE INTERACTIONS Symbolic intron re a he at says o espe coe Th i pe ae oe 4 Sth tos of theming ta te Tag hn acti Se Sings ude etn fat ae Sek ob yal pln ea steer anna Eide mma ene or eaters ent ng teas ch sida epee Seether sk ar her mee ee ee tt he meng oh tans a sea [Sut ofthe sca interac Ot ane he nth os ‘Gad rei at hee ee all ‘through, an interpretam Bas uses 16 person in dealing wit See TE wold ser ate scholus wold ee shing wrong wth thet pret homens yc the gy ih es lg a Tee Soph th slp vi iigned © payed Soe pea SF tow at wok cage aeat lea sos." Meningeaberces eee ee woet camper fuseprictasteee nema eee etacre epna or haan ve ee Dodie sc ts Weea vc trey ne eect Fone ot pyehlogaal nd sad anecteay” een ise slr th tendency ots Tons hace ‘tof various factor that play upon amas beings concer wth the behave sod with the factors rgardd ef roduc tes Ths poy nto such as isa i, ‘sows tunics ives nd hl et nae Prepon an rogutinn sod vases neg legal apts, Kent gnomes snr fsion soci on nah eee status demands, social roles, cultural prescriptions, nme anh a, daca presury, and goupalaiok wo eens esate inet sch tol gol and blo se aed slowed up the ates get ee TE SE ees pe ace "suf the particular factors regarded ns producing them theo Se ned to concen onset meaner ‘Nh hamas ngs Scone mer Wess ne oar Sl the reign oe may tee en odae the slant of meaning by ogg tet ae byregudng tava seal i mee bao ict and te bhai y ae aleged kee thee liter cue te mening diappeas fg meena ining o causa ator nt oad es eee a ‘er taumin hh tha ne aed ne eng “The poston of symbol iteration, in conta, that the ain ha hing fave fora gs ee ee SHELL To ena mange hc hag a 1s Seem as falsifying the behavior understudy. "To bypass the wey ingin oor of acer alge ope fe bee ‘eons np fhe ke mesg se oes eke ‘The spl prem that human age sec eae Bag bas ofthe meaig of sch things ach eg hats diteentnte sybe itactonin there ae eae ee Fevscis that hr ingress A map net dae bom and‘ iach es which eles ote sce of mening “Toes Se eae, Tadtonal ways of sconlng for ong of aang” them stored messing eng nis te eng str! pr fhe ete naocpa ak4 chair is leary a chair in itself, cow a com, a cloud a cloud, & {belln rebellion, and 20 forth, Being ihereat inthe thing tht has, meaning needs merely to be disengaged by observing the objective thing that has the meaning. ‘The meaning emanates 0 to such there Ts no press svolved in ite ts meesury I to recogntar the meaning that there inthe thing” T shouldbe immediatly apparent that this view reflects the traditional position of “eas” in phlesophy-—a potion that widely held and deeply entrenched in the socal snd poychor cal scincet The other major traditions view regards ian uo pycia! aatoriap eteie eee oE ating mening ha pthed eon sae ‘eing an expres GF Sistitoent elements of the eres payehe, sod, or pyehoogial organisation, ‘The contact elements ave Such hing sSnsstins, flings, dear, memrien motive and a tudes. “The meaning of «thing is hut the expression ofthe given psychological elements that are Brought nto play in connection with 8 peeping th oe ch tga chesmenag of 4 ing Br klating the paral pacalogea lene tat Se hemcaing One Ge hee se ed tal pelagic practice of analysing the meaning af en a ity eying tn tions hat tno prep ft or nthe Sntenporty race of recog te oasng oft {Rng sn a tw nf preston te tae oe ten ‘ovvews it.The lading ofthe meaning of things i psyeolog Salelements lint the proceser ofthe formato of ean fo sre ri ae ae in ding per the gen pycologenl coments that pce the manag Sach frosts ie pcg ature, tnd nce prep, co Fon rors tar offing: and action of ers ‘Smile interaconan views meaning or having a aifcent sore than hse by the wo Gamina we Ju cert Teds na gard meaning a emanating fom the tse makeup ofthe thing that ae menting, nor dacs or meaning os atk throughs tolescone of poli elements nthe ton Te wealth vou manag oy Ek poet af eaten Oe po se opin the othe: pratt Te pn othe som Tha, symbolic teractions see meanings asc prodct, sscxeation that are formed in and trough the deang acs of role as they interact This point of View gies spol nt, scons a very distinctive positon, with profound topeaton hati be dissed arr ‘Te third premise mentioned above farther dieetates sm bali ineractinsm Wie the meaning of thing formed he contest of social interation and is drive bythe peo stot lnteracton ts mistake to think thatthe we af meaning bys Peon bit an application af the meaning so dere. Thicke Seriously mas the work of many shal who athewise fll the ‘gma interacts appa,” Thy fall oe atthe oe of ‘eanings bya person nhs action ivolyes a terpsane pes nds respect they are simr to the adherent of the too eat ‘views spoken of shove-t hoe who lodge meaning inthe solos makeup ofthe thing hat has tan thon who vega st am copes Aonofpceloia clement Altre ee se scion er of meting bythe human ing n nectanes tea {roasing and application of already eaublshed mesnings Arch, RIGHT a proces of ttapretaon Figo tarsi PE TTT hil fe tings towerd whack CO te ie cing: he hart otto himel the gy tat sk sang. "The making of sch nda a eee sed roves in that he actor interact wih hist "The nie {ion with inset smiting sa Ua omerpny of peel. cal'elomeats ita te of the pers egeeog es of communication with bins, Second, by vite ofthis process of > fommoniating ith howl, latrpretiton teams Soto ending meanings. The str selects check, sagen pd wancorms the mene RS TGR ST Te ou WH a sobatoe Bea shed meanings but a 2 forntive process in hich meanings are ‘ied and revised at dastroments or the guldance and formation of actin, Tes necessary to se that meanings ply tht part Inaction through a proce of flntrecton 1 sot my purpose to dacus at ths point the mers of the thee views that lage meaning rempectively inthe thing, the_ryche and in soil action, nor to elaborate onthe contention that ‘meanings ae handled Bexibly by the actor in the course of forming his action. Instead, I wish merely to note that by being based on these thee premises, symbolic interaction is necesaily led to de velop an analytical scheme of aman society and human conduct hate quite distnctve. Tes thi scheme that [now propose to ot Tine, ‘Symbolic interationism is grounded on » number of basic eas, oc oot images,” a I prefer to cll them, These oot images reer to and depict the nature of the following matters. human gtoupe or societis, social interaction, objets, the human being ab asc, human scton, and We tokens a te eso action” ken together, these Took imager represent The Way In Whig symbolic Interatonism views human secety and condact, They constitote the framework of stady and analysis Let me describe briefly each of thee soot images, Navune or ost Somme on HAY cnouF La Human rouge are seen a constng of man beings who ae gaging Seton The action const ofthe multteoussclvies Het She Individuals perforin thes fe as they encounter one sneer and 2 they del with the maconsin of sections confronting thems The individuals may act singly, they may act colsctively, ad they may sacton behalf, ora repeesenatves of ome ergentzaton or eeu Of others The atten belong to the acting did ae ae carried on by thm alvaye wih gard to he station in which they have to act "The Import ofthis ple and esentaly rede dat characteration i that fundamental human pepe esac exit not ol ation. This plctre of tunan society at ation mort be the staring pit (and the point of return) for any scheme that parports tet and analyee human socety empirically. Concept schemes that dopa sce in some ther fashion can only be derivations from the cpl of ongoing ctv that consitetes group fe This i tea the two dominant Conceptions of society tn contemporary sacilgy-that ef calle td that of socal structure.” Calle a4 cangeton, haber de feed at cen, tition, oe al cH dey gust row wat people do Simla ancl scree ny of ‘ts pests, as represented by such tems as social positon, sats, 6 ole, authority, and prestige, refers to relationships derived fom Tow pomp ac ternal The We oy aan sy ‘sits necesarly of a ongoing proces of Sting together ie ele its members. It is this complex of ongoi ine activity estab ad portey racture genase code Brindpl of symbalic teraction that ony enpal Steed Scheme of buman soit, however derived, st Terps the fat that in the frst and last Istances aman society comes of roe gaging inaction, To be empially Sd We hens eat oe SHOE We ate heal nto Hames a Nerunt oF soca aacnos, Group hfe necessary pres ss interaction between the group makers or put aber se a Society consist of individual Snteruting with coe anaber The Activites of the members occur predomtnanily in respon to ore snather 0° in relation o one another. Even thoegh fis recog. ze alos universal in denitons of human socket, octal ne scton wll tan for ranted and weated shaving itd fay, Signllcance in ts ow right. ‘This is evident in type social and pychologial schemes they treat socal fterscon sr me idan Gupigh whch the detrmins BRS “ce the Behavior Ths, ie pea sail sao Se Teaior to sch factors as sate postion, taural pressions "ors, vahes, sanctions role dem, snd sacal tem regure ‘ments explanation in terms of rch fact ules thot poying ‘tention fo the saa teraction thatthe play neces fe supposes Similly, inthe tpi peychelgal scheme such Fre {ots at tives, atitides, hidden complex, cements of paytolop cal organization, and paychologial processes are wed to scoot ee behavior without any need of consdering socal interaction, "One lomps from such causative factors to the behavior they are supped _) © produce. Social neaction becomes ere forum trough hich sociological or peyhologiea determinants move to bring abut given forms of human behavior Tsay ad that tis igneing of ee Interaction not corrected by specing ofan inersoon of sone cements (as when a socalogit speaks of an Iteration of sock ‘oles or an Interaction between the component of roca syste) Gr an interaction of pryhologal element as when « pyc speaks ofan interaction between the atu held by dent toeae le) Socal interaction san interaction between actors and not be ese fides iain ‘Symbol ateractionism doesnot merely give a ceremonous nod to social interaction. It recognizes social interaction to be of vite importance in its ow right. This importance lies inthe fot that ocllinteration im proses dat form human conduct ined of being merely 2 means or a satin forthe expression or release of human canduct Put simply, Buman beings in interacting with dae another have to take account of what each other i doing or is about to do; they are forced to direct thei own conductor fandle Weir sltuations in terms of what they take into acoount. Thus, the activ ties of others enter as positive factors in the formation of thelr ov conduc; in the face of the actions of others one may abandon a intention or purpose, revise check or suspend it intensify fot replace it.The actions of others enter to set what coe plans to dy ‘may oppose or prevent such plans, may requie a revision of sich plans, snd may demand a very diferent set of such pans. One has {o fit one's own line of activity in seme manner to the actions of ‘others. "The actions of others ave a be faken ito account and ‘cannot be regarded as merely an arena forthe expression of what ‘one is disposed todo or sets out to do, We are indebted to George Herbert Mead fr the most penetra Ing analysis of social interaction-an analysts that sqetes with the realistic account just given Mead kdentier two forms lve of o- al interaction in human society. He refers to therm respectively a6 ‘the conversation of gestures” and “the use of significant symbole, T shall term thee sexpectvey “non-sybelic interaction” aad “yn boli interaction." Non-symbolic interaction takes place when one responds directly to the acon of another without ibterpeting that ‘ction; symbole interaction involves iaterpretation of the tion. [Nonsjmbelic interaction is most readily apparent in refer 1e- sponses, asin the case of « borer who automatically raves his a pperya blow. However, if the borer were refectively to identi the {oethcoming blow from his opponent at afin designed to trap hi hhe would be engaging in symbolic interaction. tn this cite, he ‘would endeavor to ascertain the meaning ofthe blow that i, what the blow signfes as to is opponents plan, In their association Jnuman beings engage pletflly in not-symbolic interaction a they respond immediately and unreBectivelyt each ethers bodily move. “Thirst, sents, expressions and toes of voice, but thes character mode sf teraction ion the synoki lew, ar they sek to understand the meaning ofeach othe action ‘Meads analysis of symbolic interaction is highly important. He SOI teins gets nda emit ee gestres. A gesture any pat ov sopet ofan ongoing actin tha gies the ager act of which t Bre partctor amie the shaking of fst as an indication of «posible tack, Oe deca tion of war by a natin asa ndiaton of « posture ae ne of Action ofthat matin. Such things as segues ordr, commands ‘uc, and declarations are estres hat convey fo the person wh ‘ecognies them an idea ef the lntstion and plan of forthcoming action of the individ who presents them. The peson who ne ‘ponds oxgaizs his response onthe bso what he genres mean {ohim; the person who presets the gestures advances hem aa «ations or sgn of what he fs planniog to do aswell sof what he ats the respondent todo of understand. Thus the genre hes ‘eanng for both the person who makes i and forthe parson to whom iis directed. When the gesture ha te ne mening for Doty the two partis understand each other Faom ths bef ao cout can beeen that the mening ofthe gesture fows ot ak pe teadit. Sn a ee eS adi seca ey eee a etson to whom ie dee Sse at ie a 1 do, and signer te or ac, MCHA 1p his hands is (1) an indication of what the victim isto do, (0) an indication of what the robber plas to do, thai, olive the vitim of his money, tnd (c) an indication ofthe joint act being formed, in this case a holdup. If thee is confusion or misunderstanding along any one of these three lines of meaning, communication is inefective, tater: toni impeded, and the formation of foint actin ts Backed ‘One ational feature should be added to round out Mead's analysis of symbolic interaction, namely, thatthe partis to uch Interaction must necestarly take each others roles. To indeate to {-! ‘nother what he Is to do, oe Fa standpoint of that other; o order the victim to put up his hands the robber hat to see this response in terms of the vitim making it Correspondingly, the victim has tose the commend from the stand the Tndication from the 2404oon Oe Pe [orb anbrd orth reget nde’ ee pe ermal ese ee ca ag seh erry ate oat ne Speed oe ne aie ee Ne plppeeerl regres apogee a ey ee see Sesc cine cn ramen oh bale be Se eee cee eee es Se ee eee Sie oe ek ee tng ee Pree anaes coe ae aed Sart ee ep ces en mete oe “hla el ea ‘reba ae tnd pont fad pan eh ees pe ome ee See ee See ae eae ea eee a, Piste rans ec, ny Nawas oF onjeers_ The poston of mle ert that he wee that et fb bolgy ad far ek peas tr capone faeces athe poet Sele mterston ha ot tng at cas tet, ying that spout oo toned fore do ask sega tte a bunker, arlgous doin ah, sod fh’ Ftp poses of convenience oe ca daly Screg) bya abet such cats, two jl, lable, ‘Ths sia priya peste ihe ora an Oa et bjs, sch at tal pei, posophal daseen "WE METHODOLOOICAL POSTION OF tAROLEIMACTONSL ides such a juts, eatation, or compassion, Le sb i nyt Thema aft abjet=o any and every abjot-conssts ofthe meaning hat ‘as forthe person for whom Wt ian object This meaning St te yin shich he ens th bie, eat a wh TE BEETS ject may have diferent meaning lor difereat olivia ter pill bo a dferent objet to's Botan, humberman, a pont and home gardener, the Preside ofthe United Sater ‘ca be 2 Aileen objet to a devoted meter of his pala party then Wo member af the opposition the member ofan elie group may be seen as fret kindof objet by mene of eher erage The ‘meaingof objets for «person snes andamently ot of the way they ace defined to him by others with whem he interact "Thas te ome to learn through the lication of obs that sca ca {hat doctors area certaln kind of profesional tht dhe Uted State ‘Costin’ ven Kind of legal dace, and so forth Osta proces of mutual indications common ebnts emerge objec tat isvethe sane mts ert phen al eae ee sone manger bythe Several noteworthy consequences follow from the foregoing dt which takes a oe ol nse of a the ming asthe hs for desing racine ‘wl regard to what W ote nots sesponse called oth by the ‘esetation of wha i ots but asta a acon tase oot Of the fterpretation made though the proces ef sf inaton 1 this sense, the human being who is engaging in slntracton i tots mere responding erganian but an acing organi ee on {nism that ha to mold ale of acon onthe Bass ehet ites foto account instead of merely releasing a response tothe slay af some factor oni organation arom or nc acr0m. The capac ofthe ham bing to make indications to himself giver» detncve charset te hobs ction. It mens that the human individual confronts nea en ‘he mst interpret in order tat fstend ofan coronene oe he responds Because of his orgaietion He hast cope ih ‘ations in which he scaled on tat, acrtaning the monang ofthe action of thers and mapping ot his own ln of sion he light of such interpretation, He hat fo consrot nad eh oe tion instead of merely releasing iti responce to facts payne him or operating through him’ He may doe mbersble Bk akon strcting his action, but heh to contact ek “This iow ofthe human Being diacting bis action by king oe ications to himself ands sary in coms fo the vow ot soy ction that dominates caren payebelogal end seal scene Tg dominant view, a aleady taped, erbes heman sen to ok inating factor or a combination of such factors, Acton & taced Back ouch matters at motives, ate, need dapestione eae Wurenati a tol doe Toe ee Wee o A Mtg GEHL gered flog he cose task Yet. uch an approach igure and males spe oes aces of lf iteractn though which he edvabad ats York and consis his action The dau cls tothe el fe sof inept n wich th inde test ss a & preseted to him and throogh which he maga ot neo eat Trlr prior to their exoton Fundatnestly, ation on the part of a human being cost of tig scout of varios things tat he notes tad fg a