排序方式: 共有5条查询结果,搜索用时 125 毫秒
1
1.
2.
Symbolic interactionists have by and large not explored how individuals with mental illnesses—specifically, delusional misidentification syndromes—are able to exercise the cognitive factors necessary for successful interaction. Such factors include: recognition of self and others, situated interpretation, inferring others’ cognitive and emotional states, anticipating what others might say or do, empathizing, maintaining a cogent belief system, etc. What needs to be addressed is how the mentally ill manage—and fail to manage—these cognitively-informed activities
as they slip more and more into cognitive and existential chaos, and the associated loss of meaningful dialogue with self
and others. Clinical accounts of the cognitively dysfunctional could widen and deepen our understanding of cognition, belief states, self, and self-other relations, central concepts for symbolic interactionists. Accordingly, this paper is as much a critique of symbolic interactionism
as a contribution to a humanistic social psychology. 相似文献
3.
4.
Paul Tibbetts 《Sociological inquiry》1985,55(4):327-347
This paper examines the causal and explanatory role assigned to intrapersonal (or P-) variables in the recent sociological literature on collective behavior. In Part I emphasis is on the use–or nonuse–of P-variables as factors mediating between collective behavior episodes and their antecedent social and situational determinants. It is suggested that P-variables have been (1) excluded on methodological grounds in favor of more directly observable and/or manipulable behavior, (2) analyzed as dependent variables, defined by and contingent on antecedent social and situational considerations, or (3) introduced as independent variables and therefore significantly figuring in any explanatory account of collective behavior. Part II deals with the conceptually deeper issue concerning the terminology and metaphors employed in the literature regarding collective behavior and its causal antecedents. 相似文献
5.
1