Social Action Theories Symbolic Interactionism and Labelling Interactionism

Social Action Theories Symbolic Interactionism and Labelling

Interactionism Functionalism, Marxism and Feminism offer general explanations of society as a whole, and so they are sometimes known “Macro systems”. They see human behaviour as being shaped by the system. Interactionism on the other hand focuses on small scale interaction rather than on society as a whole. It usually rejects the notion of a social system – and doesn’t regard human actions as a response to the system.

Not a structural theory Social Action or Interactionist sociologists argue that people do not feel that they are being controlled all of the time – they generally feel free to make their own decisions People learn from their interactions with others – we develop a stock of knowledge about what is appropriate behaviour in various situations.

Interactionists argue not only that people interpret the social world around them, but also that how they do so is influenced by the way that they interact with other people. In these interactions people use symbols such as words and gestures to communicate meaning and then react to other people’s actions in terms of how this is interpreted.

Symbolism Interactionists are concerned with interactions (encounters, conversations, body language, expressions). They begin with the assumption that action is meaningful between those involved. Humans are different from other animals because they have the ability to use language as a symbolic system. (Mead) IN order to understand others we must understand the meanings that were given to activities by actors

The important thing to remember is that meanings of things are not fixed. Meanings can be created, developed, modified and changed through the actual process of interaction. Meaning The ways in which actors define situations has important consequences. It represents their reality – how they think the world is. Everyone can experience the world differently, and so reality can be different for all

Self Concepts Interactionists argue that individuals are concerned with how others see them and so develop a self-concept, a picture of themselves. Self-concept develops from interaction – so it’s about how people are trying to present themselves, and also how others respond to them – it is a two way process of development- what people feel about themselves and how they are living up to the roes they have taken, as well as how other people are responding to them in those roles.

Self Conscious Because we have the ability to symbolise through language, we can imagine ourselves in situations that we don’t actually have to be in. We can put ourselves in the place of another person and imagine how we would feel or act in that situation – this is also known as empathy, an understanding of others’ emotions.

Role-Taking In our daily lives we all inhabit a number of different roles, and we adapt ourselves to the different situations we meet throughout the day – mother, daughter, teacher, friend, customer, colleague, driver, pedestrian. There are crossover points where people can imagine what it would be like to inhabit a different role

Processes We make ourselves and re-make ourselves through the repetition of daily activities. These processes reinforce our sense of self. Our daily routines make us who we are, and keep us grounded in our place, bring us security and understanding of the world.

Identity Personal identity can be about what separates us from others – but also about what joins us to others. Can be hard to understand because we can all have so many different identities – there are legal definitions, such as citizenship of a country, there are long-term categories, such as ethnicity and gender and possibly social class, but there also short term categories (what can you think of here? ). Which are the strongest influences on who we consider ourselves essentially to be? Are we linked to all other people who define themselves in the same groups?

Erving Goffman One of the most important thinkers in this field. He argued that social life was like a drama – when we go out in public we are like actors taking on roles. We prepare ourselves for performances. There is a “front stage” where social life takes place, and we all act our roles, and there is a “back stage” where we prepare ourselves, and behaviour is more natural and less thought out.

Performance Goffman argued that the social self we present to the world is often simply a performance designed to create a particular impression. You behave differently in front of different people.

This is the idea that if someone is given a negative label, then it can affect the way they interact with others, and eventually override their other identities, to become their “master status” – so their actual personality, this is the self-fulfilling prophecy. Labelling Theory For example, many people may experiment with drugs at a young age, many people will not be caught, and will move on with their lives and make a great success in whatever field they choose. However, those who are caught, and are charged by the police, and sent to court and labelled “user”, may find that this can have a longterm effect, they may lose their job, lose friends and family, become depressed, and eventually may take more drugs, as this is what they have been labelled as.

Summary: Action Theories Social action is a result of individual or group interaction. Society is made up of individuals who live in it Social roles, social actors, and social processes are important Analyses society in terms of individuals and groups (rather than structures) To understand any social behaviour we must look at meaning and interpretation

Goffman Institutionalisation Goffman talked about how patients in a mental hospital are broken down, and forced to give up control of every aspect of their lives and their identity, so that the hospital can then rebuild them in an image they find more appealing to society. This can also be linked to re-education camps in China, and even organisations such as the Armed Forces.

Strengths of Action Theory It takes account of the role of human agency (so the fact that individuals can make decisions for themselves and can impact on other people’s lives) Good at explaining the small scale interactions of life. It is important in explaining the meaning and motives attached to social behaviour and the interpretation of social behaviour by others.

Weaknesses of Action Theory Analysis tends to be of individuals or groups and so overlooks wider social forces, or the use of power in society. Tends to lack historical perspective – can only really study in the moment, rather than the development of society. Emphasises meaning without truly investigating the origins of those meanings. Can be seen as subjective (so different from the perspective of each human being – does not really explain much in terms of the group, or may only apply to one society – modern Western society)