Extending the Symbolic Interactionist Theory of Interaction Processes: A Conceptual Outline

This article outlines the elements of a more robust symbolic interactionist theory of interpersonal processes. I argue that George Herbert Mead's conceptualization of interaction processes can be extended to explain not only micro‐level social processes but also key elements of meso‐ and macro‐level dynamics. By expanding Mead's and more recent symbolic interactionist theorizing, and incorporating key ideas from other theoretical traditions outside symbolic interactionism proper, it becomes possible to develop a theory of interaction that fills in important conceptual gaps in theories on the dynamics of micro‐, meso‐, and macro‐level social phenomena.     

Violent Crime: A Symbolic Interactionist Study*

An empirically based analysis of violent crime is presented which suggests several things. First, persons commit violent criminal acts only after theyform one of four distinct types of interpretations of the situation. Second, the self images of violent actors fall into three basic types. Third, the types of self images that they hold are linked to the types of interpretations theyform. The conclusion drawn is that persons who commit violent crimes have one of three types of generalized others.     

A Symbolic Interactionist Analysis of Politics

The purpose of this article will be to outline a symbolic interactionist approach to the study of politics in the United States. In the course of this presentation, the basic assumptions and concepts of the interactionist perspective will be presented, culminating in a model of society as a negotiated order. This model in conjunction with definitions of power and politics will provide the basis for analyzing the processes of power. The article will focus on and emphasize two mechanisms of power, information flow control and symbolic mobilization of support, which have previously been unrecognized and unan-alyzed. In the conclusion, the strengths and weaknesses of the approach will be discussed.     

Looking‐Glass Self: Goffman as Symbolic Interactionist

My thesis is that for most of his career, Erving Goffman was a symbolic interactionist in the Cooley line. The only sustained theoretical structure in Goffman's work before 1974 follows Cooley's conjecture of the looking‐glass self. Cooley assumed shared awareness, that we “live in the minds of others.” He also realized that shared awareness is virtually invisible in modern societies and proposed pride or shame as the emotions that resulted. Goffman emphasized embarrassment over shame and implied a fourth step beyond Cooley's three: the management of embarrassment or shame. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life is dense with these emotions. Goffman proposed conceptual definitions of the embarrassment and shared awareness that are central to Cooley's idea. The conjunction of shared awareness and emotion in Goffman's examples may be the main feature that arouses reader sympathy. Two hypotheses are formulated here, along with techniques that might be used to test or apply them.     

Symbolic Interaction Theory and Architecture

Architectural sociology is receiving renewed attention but still remains a neglected area of investigation. As a major theoretical perspective within sociology, symbolic interaction helps us understand how the designed physical environment and the self are intertwined, with one potentially influencing and finding expression in the other; how architecture contains and communicates our shared symbols; and how we assign agency to some of our designed physical environment, which then invites in a different kind of self‐reflection. This article discusses numerous instances of symbolic interaction theory–architecture connections, with applied examples showing how symbolic interactionists and architects can collaborate on projects to the benefit of each, and to the benefit of humanity.     

Fashion,Postmodernity and Personal Appearance: A Symbolic Interactionist Formulation

A theoretical explanation of fashion change is offered, drawing upon symbolic-interactionist insights on fashion and appearance, and developing macro-micro connections between cultural ambivalence and the negotiation of meaning as inspired by symbolic ambiguity in appearances. The postmodern condition, connected with advanced capitalism, spawns cultural ambivalence and a plethora of clothing styles that emerge, in part, to clarify and lend expression to ambivalence. A broad variety of clothing styles, however, coupled with tendencies toward production of self, contribute to a high degree of ambiguity in individually constructed appearances, the meaning of which must then be collectively negotiated in social interaction. Failure of clothing styles to resolve cultural ambivalence results in fashion change in an ongoing dialectic.     

The Study of Language in Organizations: A Symbolic Interactionist Stance

Very few models have been developed fromresearch on language in organizations, and those thatexist are usually very general. In addition, theassumptions on which they are based are not alwaysexplicit, which means that the limits of the modelsthemselves cannot be seen. After describing thecharacteristics of research that could be done onlanguage from an objectivist and a subjectivist stance,and specifying the limits of these two fundamental views, thispaper proposes an explicit model for understandinglanguage based on a symbolic interactionist stance, withemphasis on ascribing meaning and understanding language in the context of the interactivesituation in which it occurs. The interactive situationcomprises three fundamental components: theenvironmental, cognitive, and emotional contexts. In themodel, the tongue and psycholinguistic schemata of theindividuals concerned inevitably have a restrictiveeffect on the language used, and the language contextmay help make the speaker's remarks meaningful. The assumptions underlying the choice of asymbolic interactionist stance are described, and thepaper ends with some suggested avenues for researchrevealing new topics or new ways of studying oldtopics.     

Interaction Ritual Theory and Structural Symbolic Interactionism

This article develops a comparison between structural approaches to symbolic interaction, as described by Sheldon Stryker (1968, 1980, 2008) , and interaction ritual theory, elaborated by Randall Collins (1981, 1998, 2004) . The value of this comparison lies in both the similarities and differences between the perspectives: each is committed to developing empirically grounded, general knowledge and emphasizes interaction as an emergent unit of sociological analysis. However, their disparate intellectual heritages lead them to stake out different positions regarding the nature of interaction, the self, and social structure. We suggest that the differences between structural symbolic interaction and interaction ritual theory offer important areas for theoretical innovation, and we highlight a few directions that seem especially promising.     

Driving and Symbolic Interaction1

Although it is a prominent feature of modern experience, driving has received little attention from sociologists. Yet social interaction between motorists is an integral part of the traffic situation. This paper explores its bases and some of its typical dynamics. Other sociologically relevant aspects of driving are delineated and the issue of how driving may influence modern culture is addressed.     

Language and the Self: An Expanded View from a Symbolic Interactionist Perspective*

Language and the self are two of the most important elements in Mead's account of human development and action. Despite the importance of language and the self to symbolic interactionism, little attention has been devoted to exploring their interrelationhip, either theoretically or empirically. Some reasons for this neglect are suggested. By merging Mead's view of language and the self with a functional linguistic perspective new possibilities are displayed for expanding our understanding of this relationship. These are developed by considering the: a) ontogenetic, b) categorical, c) expressive, d) performative, and e) transformative aspects of the interrelationship between language and the self.     

A Test of Symbolic Interactionist Predictions About Emotions in Imagined Situations

From the perspective of symbolic interactionism, inner experiences—including emotions—are shaped culturally as individuals formulate events in words, and individual experiences are shaped socially as others contribute to the verbal formulation of one's experiences. Understanding cultural shaping and social negotiation of emotions requires understanding how emotion attributions arise from linguistic framings of events, and Affect Control Theory (ACT) offers a model of emotions that addresses this issue. We report tests of ACT predictions of emotions in 128 events against self-reported emotions of respondents imagining themselves in such situations. ACT predictions are found to correlate with self-reported emotions. Thus, empirical results validate ACT's postulate that emotions emerge from the personal impression that is generated in an event, along with the difference between that impression and the person's identity. In the conclusion, we discuss how the ACT formulation can enlighten interpretations of social negotiations regarding emotions.     

Self,Emotions, and Extreme Violence: Extending Symbolic Interactionist Theorizing

Extreme violence revolves around actions of individuals who are emotionally aroused and willing to kill themselves, if need be, to inflict harm on enemies. Terrorism, gangbanging, and genocide are conspicuous examples of extreme violence. This violence is ultimately driven by repressed negative emotions about self that are transmuted into variants of anger and combinations of anger with satisfaction‐happiness to produce emotions such as hatred, righteous anger, and vengeance. This theory combines symbolic interactionism's emphasis on identity and self with key ideas from gestalt theories, psychoanalytic theories, and interaction ritual theory as well as data from primatology, evolutionary biology, and neurology. I explain extreme violence as the outcome of several converging forces: the neurological capacity for humans as evolved apes to experience and express a large palate of high‐intensity emotions, the experience of shame in key institutional spheres, the repression of shame (and, at times, guilt and alienation as well as other highly charged negative emotions), the intensification and transmutation of these repressed emotions into variants and elaborations of anger, the making of external attributions blaming external targets for negative experiences, the portrayal of these targets in highly negative terms, and the charging up of positive emotions in interaction rituals directed at inflicting harm on external enemies.     

Symbolic Interaction with Consumer Products: An Affect Control Theory Approach

Symbolic interactionism is one of the few social psychology perspectives that recognizes the important role of physical artifacts, including consumer products, in social life. Consumer products are artifacts people can use to maintain the expressive order within social life – the order that is embedded within the shared meanings of a culture. As a formal theory of symbolic interactionism, affect control theory emphasizes culturally shared affective meaning, the impressions produced within social events, and identity processes that rely on those cultural meanings and social events. We contend that affect control theory provides a framework for understanding and researching how consumer products influence people's social experience and interaction. First, we specifically explore how affect control theory's concepts of affective meaning, identity modification, and impression management can be applied to understanding consumer products. Building on this foundation, we then consider how affect control theory might also contribute to three new research directions: social interaction with consumer products, affective design of consumer products, and the prosumer identity created from consumer products. Our conclusion is that affect control theory provides sociologists with a means of exploring the important and fascinating questions that emerge when we consider people's symbolic interaction with consumer products.     

A Sociology of No‐Self: Applying Buddhist Social Theory to Symbolic Interaction

Although fraught with complexity, the self is a central phenomenon of discussion and analysis within sociology. This article contributes to this discourse by introducing the Buddhist ideas of anatta (no‐self) and prattyasamutpāda (interdependence) as analytic frameworks to deconstruct and rethink the self within sociology. We argue that the sociological self, most clearly articulated by symbolic interactionism, is premised on a self‐other dualism. This dualism leads to a conceptualization of the self as constantly threatened and anxious. Using these Buddhist concepts we propose an alternative interpretive schema, a sociology of no‐self, for analyzing social interaction and understanding the roots of social angst.     

Symbolic Interaction and Postmodernism: Close Encounter of a Dubious Kind

My aim here is threefold: firstly, to ask those who are attracted to certain aspects of postmodernism to avoid imprudent applications of it to our work; secondly, to assess the accomplishments of Symbolic Interaction as we approach the new millennium and; thirdly, to express the hope that Symbolic Interaction will deliver on it s deepest political and philosophical values by speaking truth to power while remembering whose side it is on.