Symbolic interactionism: individuals and society as inseparable, held together by changing shared symbols¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

The essay locates Goffman in the symbolic interactionist tradition of Mead, Blumer, James, Cooley, Dewey and Thomas, a tradition favoring field research over laboratory studies and armchair writing. At its center, "individuals and society are inseparable and interdependent," and society exists through shared symbols. Because those symbols are "changing and unstable," society is not fixed and permanent, and the symbolic interactionist studies how individuals maintain shared symbols when they come together.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Studying the natural context in which individuals communicate and share symbols, which the article says makes laboratory studies insufficient

Constraints¶

Target Learners¶

• rhetoric and communication scholars

Target Learning Objectives¶

• understanding human interaction and communication through shared symbols

Claims¶

Related Theories¶

• Ethnomethodology as 'serious ethnography' for studying interaction in natural settings
• Goffman's dramaturgical model: front and back regions and the two-part self

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Corder, Lloyd E. (1988). The Utility of Erving Goffman's Theoretical Perspective, Metaphorical Models, and "Serious Ethnography" for the Rhetoric and Communication Scholar. ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED299654