George Herbert Mead Students collaborated on Mind, Self, and Society (1934) Symbolic Interaction - coined by Herbert Blumer

Symbolic Interaction Theory (SIT) People act based on that arise in a situation Individuals are , participants in social context

Three central themes driving SI A. Importance of meanings for human behavior B. Importance of self-concept C. Relationship b/w individual & society These result in 7 assumptions of SIT… So every theory we do, I’ll usually break into assumptions – things the theory puts forth as testable claims. All assumptions for any theory will basically be telling us how the concepts (the key terms, for example, that I’ll work into the descriptions) interrelate. Remember, any theory is just two things: (1) concepts and (2) their relationships. The assumptions guiding this theory are based on the ideas that (A) symbols are important to us, (B) because they shape who we are inside, and (C) who we are to others and how we interact with them. Those were all Mead’s main ideas in his original theorizing.

Assumptions of SI A. Importance of meanings for human behavior Humans act towards others on the basis of meanings others have for them Meaning created people Meaning modified through process

Assumptions of SI (cont.) B. Importance of self-concept Assumptions: Individuals develop through interaction with others Self-concepts provide important motive for behavior – self is a process

Assumptions of SI (cont.) C. Relationship b/w individual & society Assumptions: People & groups influenced by cultural & social processes Social structure worked out through social interaction We can modify situations; humans as choice makers So then our comm with others doesn’t just shape our identities, it simultaneously then shapes/constructs how we interact with other people and how we communicate overall in terms of society (seen as a larger web of social relationships humans create). At a macro level, then, our comm shapes everything! The final testable claims of this theory are that people actually get persuaded to be who they are by the ways that everything goes down in an interaction – because of specific language/symbols used. Obviously, some people’s interactions with us will mean more to us and how our identity gets shaped over time than will others’. People who are significant to us – whose opinion we value, for example, or even those who just have an ongoing role in our lives (e.g., parents, siblings, co-workers, friends, partners) are called Particular Others. All the other people we encounter throughout our lives (e.g., store clerks, teachers we only have for a little bit, strangers in the street) whose opinions may or may not matter as much to us (or may affect us in the moment, but not long-term) are called Generalized Others.

YOU Assess SI Scope – breadth of behaviors covered Logical consistency – concepts work together & show what results from their interactions Parsimony – simplicity of explanation Utility – usefulness or practicality Testability – ability to investigate Heurism – amount of new research/thinking stimulated Test of Time

Scholarly Strengths of SI Applications in a variety of contexts

Scholarly Criticisms of SI Too vague & broad Focuses too much on individual Fails to explain emotions & self-esteem