Cognition in Situations

The symbolic interactionist tradition can contribute to advancing sociological studies of cognition by setting dual process models on more solid ground. I draw on Blumer's epistemological statements and the interactionist tradition more broadly to consider how dual process models of cognition could be applied to naturally occurring situations. I suggest that attending to the ways the past and the future are handled and modified within social interaction provides a usable inroad for the sociology of cognition to engage with situational analysis. I identify “resonance” and “iterative reprocessing” as concepts that are suitable to this end.     

The Sociological Insight of W.E.B. Du Bois

W.E.B. Du Bois discussed key aspects of the new field of sociology in his early writings. This article presents Du Bois’ conception of the developing field and his sociological perspective based on nine of his key original sociological writings. Rather than generating theoretical formulations and studying abstract concepts, Du Bois insisted that sociology be an empirical science adhering to the methods utilized by the physical sciences. Sociology's major objectives are to study the “deeds of men” and to provide a science of human action. Sociological research seeks the discovery of “truth” which can form the basis of social policy. Noting that the regularity of human behavior is evidence of laws and acknowledging that human behavior is also subject to chance factors, sociology must seek to determine the limits of each. Du Bois’ research methods, based on methodological triangulation, were formulated to provide the “truths” which he eagerly sought. Du Bois was convinced that these truths were worth knowing and that sociology had the promise of becoming one of the “greatest sciences.” Attention directed toward Du Bois’ key sociological writings within sociology curricula will introduce current and future readers to the groundbreaking sociological work of the pioneer sociologist.     

Ecologies of Boundaries: Modes of Boundary Work in Professional Proto‐Jurisdictions

Ecological approaches to professional work, authority, and regulation have seen a resurgence in the sociology of professions, as epitomized in the linked ecologies framework of Andrew Abbott. Alongside this resurgence comes a renewed attention to the way symbolic and material boundaries within and between professions, as well as between professional, university, and political institutions, come to be defined, negotiated, and changed as part of ongoing professional projects. Building on and comparing case studies set in Denmark into three emerging professional “proto‐jurisdictions”—of water‐related climate adaptation, lifestyle disease prevention, and innovation management—this article identifies three key modes of interprofessional boundary work important for such projects. In doing so, it grounds Abbott's meso‐level framework of linked ecologies in more situated accounts of workplace‐level boundary interaction, by reconnecting to a wider tradition of symbolic interactionist studies of professions.     

Advancing a sociology of ignorance in the study of racism and racial non‐knowing

By a wealth of indicators, ignorance appears a bona fide if often vexing social fact. Ignorance is socially constructed, negotiated, and pervasive; ignorance is often socially inevitable, even necessary; and, without a doubt, ignorance is socially consequential. Yet, despite its significance, ignorance has appeared a largely secondary concern among sociologists. Perhaps more perplexing, while sociologists of racism, power, and domination have long focused on the ways racial ideologies distort and mystify racial understanding to sustain White supremacy over time, we have done less to elaborate ignorance than is possible and warranted. Here, I join growing calls for a fully‐fledged “sociology of ignorance” and argue that antiracist and decolonial scholars have much to gain from and contribute to such an endeavor. This article traces the historical forebears of a “sociology of ignorance” and explores ignorance as a social concept before turning to examine precedents and increasing attention to ignorance scholarship on racism, racial domination, and racialized non‐knowing. Drawing from this work, I urge race‐critical scholars take advantage of our unique position to advance theory and methodology surrounding ignorance and the social‐cultural production of non‐knowledge as a broader area of social inquiry.     

W. E. B. Du Bois as Interactionist: Reflections on the Canonical Incorporation of a Marginalized Scholar

Recent scholarship explores the relevance and canonical status of W. E. B. Du Bois in sociological theory; yet less is said about his contributions to symbolic interactionism. This paper interrogates the emerging meaning of W. E. B. Du Bois for sociology, and the nature of his canonical incorporation. We explore the less “official” dimensions of Du Boisian theory, and in particular two of his contributions to symbolic interactionism: double consciousness and autoethnography. In the last part of the paper, we suggest that Du Bois's incorporation into the sociological canon can be viewed as a process of “centering,” and argue that this form of sponsoring of Du Bois's work can elevate some interpretations of Du Bois to the detriment of others.     

Refugees as icons: Culture and iconic representation

The September 2015 photograph of Alan Kurdi, a 3‐year‐old Syrian boy, lying facedown and dead on a Turkish beach, quickly became an iconic representation of Europe's “refugee crisis.” Even though images of distant suffering of refugees have become ubiquitous, only a few become iconic. It is this cultural process of iconization that often bedevils sociologists interested in visuality. How does an image gain the necessary currency to sway public opinion or even policy making? Why do some photographs elicit profound compassion that transcends the borders of its particular context? In this review, we explore how various authors have addressed these questions, focusing on the iconic images of Alan Kurdi. The “iconic turn” in cultural sociology and in the social sciences more broadly speaking offers theoretical and methodological insights for the analysis of images such as those depicting refugees and asylum seekers. For this reason, we situate the current work in the field of refugee photography within the framework of cultural sociology, even if many of the scholars discussed are from other disciplines.     

Du Bois and the Sociology of Religion: Rediscovering a Founding Figure*

In his popular introductory sociology text, Stark identifies W. E. B. Du Bois and Albion Small as important cornerstones of the U.S. sociological tradition. While the work of the “Chicago School” is well known in sociological circles, Du Bois’ sociological legacy is not. The Philadelphia Negro ([1899] 1996) is a classic empirical sociological study that is rarely included in discussions of the development of scientific sociology. Likewise, The Negro Church ([1903b] 2003) represents one of the first empirically based sociological studies of a religious institution. Sociologists of religion routinely discuss the contributions of Durkheim, Weber, and Simmel while virtually ignoring Du Bois. This is ironic because Du Bois’ work on religion was based on ethnographic data, field interviews, surveys, and census data. This article provides an overview of Du Bois’ sociological study of the Black Church in the United States by identifying some of the main themes developed in The Philadelphia Negro ([1899] 1996), The Souls of Black Folk ([1903a] 1994), and The Negro Church ([1903b] 2003). These studies reveal that Du Bois was a pioneer in the areas of evaluation research, public sociology, service learning, and congregational studies.     

The theoretical costs of ignoring childhood: rethinking independence, insecurity, and inequality

Childhood scholars have found that age inequality can be as profound an axis of meaningful difference as race, gender, or class, and yet the impact of this understanding has not permeated the discipline of sociology as a whole. This is one particularly stark example of the central argument of this article: despite decades of empirical and theoretical work by scholars in “the social studies of childhood,” sociologists in general have not incorporated the central contributions of this subfield: that children are active social agents (not passive), knowing actors strategizing within their constraints (not innocent), with their capacities and challenges shaped by their contexts (not universally the same). I contend that mainstream sociology’s relative imperviousness has led to theoretical costs for both childhood scholars—who must re-assert and re-prove the core insights of the field—and sociologists in general. Using three core theoretical debates in the larger discipline—about independence, insecurity, and inequality—I argue that children’s perspectives can help scholars ask new questions, render the invisible visible, and break through theoretical logjams. Thus would further research utilizing children’s perspectives and the dynamics of age extend the explanatory power of social theory.     

Pragmatic Thinking about Self,Society, and Natural Environment: Mead,Carson, and Beyond

An interactionist approach provides a relevant point of view on human—natural environment relations. This essay draws on an interactionist approach from a Meadian, pragmatic, social constructionist perspective. In the context of grounded distinctions for interpreting “natural environment,” this discussion considers instances of human intervention and levels of responses, for example, individual, social, cultural, historical, and utopian, as variant, even conflicting, reconstructions of the foundational relationship of human—natural environment interaction. Incorporating a pragmatic model derived from Rachel Carson, the work at hand focuses on knowledge and ethical claims, as discourse and action shift from preventing to mitigating and adjusting environmental outcomes.     

SYMBOLIC INTERACTION AND SOCIAL POLICY ANALYSIS*

This paper explores the contribution that interactionist approaches may make to the study and understanding of social policy based on a discussion of: (1) the general orientation of the interactionist line on inquiry and the general assumptions which the theoretical stance makes about the character of the world, (2) the problems that are of primary interest to those who work within this perspective, and (3) the methodological and technical aspects of this approach. Fruitful foci for basic and applied research from the interactionist perspective include: (1) how policy is constructed through negotiation within a structural context, (2) the multiple interpretations of policy intent and implementation, (3) the experience and meaning of social “problems” for those who are the intended objects of the social policies, and (4) the consequences of policies for the social order. Some of the major properties of the social policy context (uncertainty, decentralization, and political pluralism) are explored for their relevance to social policy analysis. Finally, we discuss the contribution of an institutional-contextual-social worlds approach as a macro-micro bridging mechanism in social policy studies.     

Ambivalent Interactionist: Anselm Strauss and the “schools” of Chicago sociology

This article takes up the discussion recently stimulated through the volume, A Second Chicago School? That book’s connecting postwar Chicago sociology with the “Chicago approach” of mainly the 1910s to 1930s is extended, going back as far as the turn of the twentieth century and also forward to the 1990s, with a view endorsing Simmelian interactionism as opposed to Spencerian utilitarianism. Albion Small, first Chairman of the Chicago Department, introduced a Simmelian sociology to the U.S., and the question arises to what extent this legacy is being realized until today. Using Anselm Strauss as a case in point, the article has two main parts. Part One recapitulates various attempts at understanding the phases and realms of Chicago sociology. The focus is not only on the various “Chicago Schools” that may be separated, but also the differences in the work of three scholars who often are grouped together under the label of Chicago, namely Herbert Blumer, Robert Park, and Everett Hughes. Part Two recollects Strauss’s intellectual biography, as life of a scholar determined to make a contribution to modern sociology, in the name of “Chicago interactionism.” Strauss’s work, however, came to endorse Spencerian-type utilitarianism more than Simmelian-type interactionism from the middle 1960s onwards—thereby joining in with anti-structural functionalism tendencies in American sociology.     

Max weber's vision of economic sociology

Max Weber's economic sociology is usually associated with The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904–1905), but in this paper I show that what Weber himself called his “Wirtschaftssoziologie”, or economic sociology, looked quite different and was something that he developed during the last year of his life, 1919–1920. I present and outline Weber's (later) economic sociology and pay particular attention to his ideas of “economic (social) action” and of the three different forms of capitalism (rational capitalism, political capitalism and traditional capitalism). I also show that to Weber, economic sociology was part of a more general science of economics that he often referred to as “social economics” (“Sozialökonomik”). The paper ends with a comparison between the paradigm of economic sociology, which can be found in the work of Max Weber, and the paradigm of what is known as New Economic Sociology.     

Sociology Hesitant: The Continuing Neglect of W.E.B. Du Bois

W.E.B. Du Bois’ early work as a sociologist from 1896 to 1914 represents a milestone in the development of modern sociology. His empirical studies often employed a triangular methodological approach, and by grounding The Philadelphia Negro in what is the earliest extensive social survey by an American sociologist, Du Bois set the stage for the growth of sociology as a legitimate science. In fact, his approach became the model that the discipline eventually followed. Had Du Bois been white, he would have been recognized as a leading founder of the field. Since Du Bois’ early sociological scholarship was completed during the height of the Jim Crow era, his brilliant landmark work was largely negated by the profession. His scholarly accomplishments clearly focused on establishing a scientific sociology. Based on his exemplary work, can sociology finally negate the sociological negation of W.E.B. Du Bois?     

THE ROMANTIC ANTECEDENTS OF MEADIAN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY*

Mead's life-long interest in Romanticism is the least studied aspect of his work. As summarized in Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century, Meadian explorations in romantic philosophy and sociology provide a valuable insight into his substantive contributions. The present paper seeks to amplify this insight and explores its relevance to the interactionist tradition in sociology. Special attention is given to the Meadian claim that the modern notion of self first appears in the romantic literature. Mead's emphasis on the interplay between the social structure and the structure of the self is linked to the romantic vision of the self as the microcosm of the social macrocosm. The current controversy over Mead and Chicago sociology is given a new interpretation in light of the dialectical premises inherent in the Meadian and romantic theories of self.     

The Enduring Social Psychology of Robert K. Merton: Motivating Sentiments,Reference Groups and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies

Robert K. Merton (1910–2003) gained renown as a distinguished sociologist, especially in connection with the paradigm of “structural-functionalism” and he publicly self-identified as a “structuralist.” This paper calls attention to an emphasis in Merton’s work that sociologists have often overlooked, namely, his social psychology. I argue that, throughout his long career, Merton consistently pursued social psychological issues, including how non-logical action, appeals to shared sentiments and collective definitions of situations affect life in organized groups. I shall characterize his earlier analyses as “Harvard style,” and his later social psychological works as “Chicago style,” as a heuristic means of calling attention to interesting variations in framing. Merton’s formulations have impacted numerous subfields of sociology, and some (e.g., “self-fulfilling prophecies,” “the Matthew Effect”) remain influential even today. Examining Merton’s social psychology will contribute both to a fuller appreciation of his career and also to a more complete history of social science in the United States.     

British terrorism preemption: Subjectivity and disjuncture in Channel “de-radicalization” interventions

This article examines Channel “de-radicalization” interventions, which take place on individuals suspected of having the potential to commit terrorist crimes. Situated within critical security studies, the article explores the British Prevent programme by utilizing primary interviews with hard-to-reach Channel mentors and senior Prevent officials. Following the work of anticipatory risk-governance scholarship, this research illuminates the three processes of risk-visibilization (how an individual becomes sufficiently “seen” as harbouring risk that they are offered Channel mentorship), risk-calculation (how practitioners negotiate supposed riskiness), and risk-knowing (how practitioners “know” risks they observe). It demonstrates how the practice of preemptive counter-terrorism is subsumed inherently by—even relies upon—subjectivity and human prejudice, and fundamental disagreements between practitioners. Through substantial empirical contribution on the phenomenon of Channel interventions, the discussion highlights ultimately that the algorithmic rationale of preemptive risk-spotting normalizes the suspicion of banal and everyday behaviors, precisely because such interventions are ultimately deployed through worst-case imaginations.     

The Potential Contributions of Quantitative Research to Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic interactionism is often mischaracterized as a perspective that rejects quantitative research. We argue that the rich conceptual tradition of symbolic interactionism allows for the use of quantitative data and statistical analysis within a pragmatist epistemology and that this is desirable, especially in conjunction with qualitative data. We discuss types of quantitative data and their appropriate uses and then describe types of contemporary multivariate statistical methods and what they offer. To illustrate these data and analytic techniques, we draw from examples in our area of specialization, criminology, and from our own quantitative work. Researchers can use quantitative data and methods in the service of six core symbolic interactionist concerns—meaning, variation, comparisons, situations, contexts, and probability—and we contend that quantification and statistics pose no threat to the interactionist perspective. In fact, the principled, critical use of quantitative research can enhance it.     

Symbolic Interaction and Applied Social Research: A Focus on Translational Science

In symbolic interaction, a traditional yet unfortunate and unnecessary distinction has been made between basic and applied research. The argument has been made that basic research is intended to generate new knowledge, whereas applied research is intended to apply knowledge to the solution of practical (social and organizational) problems. I will argue that the distinction between basic and applied research in symbolic interaction is outdated and dysfunctional. The masters of symbolic interactionist thought have left us a proud legacy of shaping their scholarly thinking and inquiry in response to and in light of practical issues of the day (e.g., Park and Blumer). Current interactionist work continues this tradition in topical areas such as social justice studies. Applied research, especially in term of evaluation and needs assessment studies, can be designed to serve both basic and applied goals. Symbolic interaction provides three great resources to do this. The first is its orientation to dynamic sensitizing concepts that direct research and ask questions instead of supplying a priori and often impractical answers. The second is its orientation to qualitative methods, and appreciation for the logic of grounded theory. The third is interactionism's overall holistic approach to interfacing with the everyday life world. The primary illustrative case here is the qualitative component of the evaluation of an National Institutes of Health‐funded, translational medical research program. The qualitative component has provided interactionist‐inspired insights into translational research, such as examining cultural change in medical research in terms of changes in the form and content of formal and informal discourse among scientists; delineating the impact of significant symbols such as “my lab” on the social organization of science; and appreciating the essence of the self‐concept “scientist” on the increasingly bureaucratic and administrative identities of medical researchers. This component has also contributed to the basic social scientific literature on complex organizations and the self.     

Interaction Theory in the Federal Republic of Germany: Development,Current Position,Themes, and Problems

After the end of World War II in West Germany, action and interaction theories and phenomenological sociology occupied only fringe positions. At the end of the 1960s, criticism of the prevalent neopositivistic research methodology, systems theory, and the rapidly spreading critical theory increased. This, coupled with the positive reception given symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology from the United States, caused interaction theories to flourish. Today they are among the four or five main schools of thought in West German sociology. In methodological work, the “interpretative” or “communicative” social research of the time developed the narrative interview and life history method. Group discussion and participant observation were also used for interactionist social research. A survey of the subjects interactionists have covered in their research shows how widely interaction theory has been applied. The main themes of current interaction theory are: (1) conceptualizing the difference between unpremeditated behavior and meaningful action, (2) formulating a theory that covers both “structure” and “action”, and (3) developing an interactionist macro theory. The future of interaction theory is analyzed and assessed optimistically.