The Experts below are selected from a list of 19965 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Lonnie Athens - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
“Radical” and “symbolic” Interactionism: Demarcating their borders
Radical Interactionism on the Rise, 2013Co-Authors: Lonnie AthensAbstract:Abstract In this chapter, the approach of radical Interactionism is juxtaposed against symbolic Interactionism, its older conservative turned rival cousin, to highlight primarily the major differences between them. The five key differences identified are as follows: (1) the major progenitors for symbolic Interactionism are Mead and Blumer, while those for radical Interactionism are Park and, by default, myself; (2) although radical Interactionism presumes that domination and power are always of great importance for understanding human group life, symbolic Interactionism assumes that they now have only limited importance for understanding it; (3) radical Interactionism makes it mandatory for researchers to examine the role of dominance and power during social interaction, whereas symbolic Interactionism makes it only discretionary; (4) while radical Interactionism stresses the impact of individuals’ and groups’ unstated assumptions on their interaction with one another, symbolic Interactionism de-emphasizes their impact on it; and finally (5) radical Interactionism discourages, while symbolic Interactionism encourages researchers falling into the trap of linguistic phenomenalism. Thus, unlike radical Interactionism, symbolic Interactionism facilitates sociologists not only falling prey to linguistic phenomenalism, but also conservative and idealistic biases, while allegedly conducting “value-free research.”
-
Interactionism the emerging landscape
2011Co-Authors: Norman K Denzin, Lonnie Athens, Ted FaustAbstract:Volume 36 of "Studies in Symbolic Interaction" is solely devoted to the "Blue-Ribbon Papers". Nine papers are published in which hotly-contested issues are raised that, even if only resolved partially, could permanently change the future direction of interactional thought. Among the questions addressed are: whether there ever existed a genuine sociological school of thought based on "interactionsim" at the University Chicago, whether Herbert Blumer misinterpreted the major thrust of George Herbert Mead's thought, whether conventional or radical Interactionism is the most insightful perspective from which to examine crucial life decisions that are conflict-ridden, whether George Herbert Mead's and George Santayana's perspectives converged with or diverged from one another's and with radical Interactionism, whether language develops primarily from the inside out or from the outside in, whether personal economics is mainly responsible for self esteem and the over-all functioning of the self in everyday life, and whether filming constitutes a method of recording data that traditional ethnographers should include in their tool box?
-
the roots of radical Interactionism
Journal for The Theory of Social Behaviour, 2009Co-Authors: Lonnie AthensAbstract:A plea has been made for replacing the perspective of "symbolic Interactionism" with a new interactionist's perspective—"radical Interactionism." Unlike in symbolic Interactionism, where Mead's and Blumer's ideas play the most prominent roles, in radical Interactionism's, Park's ideas play a more prominent role than either Mead's or Blumer's ideas. On the one hand, according to Mead, the general principle behind the organization of human group life was once dominance, but it is now "sociality." On the other hand, according to Park, this general principle is now and has always been dominance. Blumer takes a position much closer to Mead's than Park's arguing that the general principle underlying the organization of human group life is sociality. Under certain special conditions, however, it can become dominance. Although like radical Interactionism, symbolic Interactionism is rooted in pragmatism, unlike in radical Interactionism, symbolic Interactionism is still plagued with strains of utopian thought, among which the notion of sociality is the most virulent. Sociality may be the principle on which human group life is organized in heaven, but, down here on earth, it remains organized on the basis of domination. Thus, radical Interactionism provides a much-needed antidote to the idealistic overtones still found in symbolic Interactionism.
-
Radical Interactionism: Going Beyond Mead*
Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 2007Co-Authors: Lonnie AthensAbstract:George Herbert Mead argues that human society is comprised of six basic institutions—language, family, economics, religion, polity, and science. I do not believe that he can be criticized for making institutions the cornerstones of a society, but he can definitely be criticized for his explanation of how our basic institutions originate, how these institutions operate in society after their inception, and how they later change, modifying society in the process. The problem with Mead's explanation of these three critical matters is that he based them on his principle of “sociality” rather than on the principle of “domination.” If Mead's principle of sociality is replaced by the principle of domination and his notion of the “generalized other” is replaced by the notion of the “phantom community,” then most of these problems can be largely solved. Thus, in this paper, I will not only point out the key problems in Mead's theory of society, but I will also offer solutions to them based on the notions of domination and the “phantom community.” The end product is a “radical Interactionism” that surpasses Mead's original Interactionism in identifying the part that both domination and the composite “other” play in every known human society—big and small, and past and present.
Deborah Sundin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
post structural feminist interpretive Interactionism
Nurse Researcher, 2013Co-Authors: Elaine Jefford, Deborah SundinAbstract:AIM To present an adaptation of interpretive Interactionism that incorporates and honours feminist values and principles. BACKGROUND Interpretive Interactionism as described by Denzin can be useful when examining interactive processes. It is especially useful when events affect turning points in people's lives. When issues of power and power imbalances are of interest, a critical post-structural lens may be of use to the researcher. The authors planned to examine the interactions between midwives and women at the 'epiphaneal' points of decision making during second-stage labour. It became clear that it was necessary to honour and thus incorporate feminist principles and values in their methodology. DATA SOURCES This paper draws on a recently completed PhD project to demonstrate the application of post-structural feminist interpretive Interactionism. Twenty six midwives representing each state and territory across Australia who were representative of every model of midwifery care offered in Australia were interviewed to gauge their experiences of what they believed represented good and poor case examples of decision making during second-stage labour. REVIEW METHODS The authors critique the philosophical underpinnings of interpretive Interactionism, and then modify these to acknowledge and incorporate post-structural and feminist ideologies. DISCUSSION Interpretive Interactionism is a useful methodology when the research question is best addressed by examining interactional processes and the meanings people make of them, especially if these occur at turning points in people's lives. Interpretive Interactionism methodology can and should be improved by taking account of issues of power, feminism and post-structural values. CONCLUSION Post-structural feminist interpretative Interactionism has much to offer healthcare researchers who want to develop methodologically robust findings. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE/RESEARCH Post-structural feminist interpretive Interactionism enables the researcher to be more cognisant of the complex social political and historical context of midwifery. Researchers using feminist and post-structural ideologies will enhance research findings when these tools are applied consciously and reflexively.
-
critical post structural interpretive Interactionism an update on denzin s methodology
Nurse Researcher, 2008Co-Authors: Deborah Sundin, Kathleen FahyAbstract:This paper by Deborah Sundin and Kathleen Fahy critiques Denzin's interpretive Interactionism in light of critical and postmodern ideas that undermine its theoretical foundations. The authors argue that interpretive Interactionism can be improved by acknowledging insights from critical social theory. They present modifications and adaptations to arrive at a methodologically robust research design called critical, post-structural, interpretive Interactionism.
Sheldon Stryker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
from mead to a structural symbolic Interactionism and beyond
Review of Sociology, 2008Co-Authors: Sheldon StrykerAbstract:This review discusses the continuing value of and problems in G.H. Mead's contributions to sociology from the standpoint of the contemporary discipline. It argues that the value is considerable and the problems largely avoidable with modifications to Mead's framework; it also offers necessary modifications via structural symbolic Interactionism. Permitting the development of testable theories such as identity theory is a major criterion in evaluating a frame, and capacity to bridge to other frames and theories inside and outside sociology is another. The review examines bridges from the structural symbolic interactionist frame and identity theory to other symbolic interactionist theories, to other social psychological frames and theories in sociology, to cognitive social psychology, and to structural sociology.
-
from mead to a structural symbolic Interactionism and beyond
2008Co-Authors: Sheldon StrykerAbstract:This essay discusses the continuing value of and problems in G. H. Mead's contributions to sociology from the standpoint of the contemporary discipline. It argues that the value is considerable and the problems largely avoidable with modifications to Mead's framework. And it offers necessary modifications via structural symbolic Interactionism. Permitting the development of testable theories such as identity theory is a major criterion in evaluating a frame; capacity to bridge to other frames and theories inside and outside sociology is another. The essay examines bridges from the structural symbolic interactionist frame and identity theory to other symbolic interactionist theories, to other social psychological frames and theories in sociology, to cognitive social psychology, and to structural sociology.
-
whither symbolic interaction reflections on a personal odyssey
Symbolic Interaction, 2003Co-Authors: Sheldon StrykerAbstract:This essay reflects my experiences over fifty-five years in the world of sociology and sociologists. It assumes these experiences hold more general meaning and so can illuminate the present and anticipate the future of symbolic Interactionism. My views of interactionist theory and methods developed in opposition to widely accepted views stemming from Herbert Blumer's writings, creating a cycle of antagonism that impeded communication and learning across the divide. Recently, antagonism apparently has decreased, and respect and trust have increased commensurately If true, the future of symbolic Interactionism is brighter, as respect and trust allow the communication and learning from one another that was missing previously.
Kathleen Fahy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
critical post structural interpretive Interactionism an update on denzin s methodology
Nurse Researcher, 2008Co-Authors: Deborah Sundin, Kathleen FahyAbstract:This paper by Deborah Sundin and Kathleen Fahy critiques Denzin's interpretive Interactionism in light of critical and postmodern ideas that undermine its theoretical foundations. The authors argue that interpretive Interactionism can be improved by acknowledging insights from critical social theory. They present modifications and adaptations to arrive at a methodologically robust research design called critical, post-structural, interpretive Interactionism.
Elaine Jefford - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
post structural feminist interpretive Interactionism
Nurse Researcher, 2013Co-Authors: Elaine Jefford, Deborah SundinAbstract:AIM To present an adaptation of interpretive Interactionism that incorporates and honours feminist values and principles. BACKGROUND Interpretive Interactionism as described by Denzin can be useful when examining interactive processes. It is especially useful when events affect turning points in people's lives. When issues of power and power imbalances are of interest, a critical post-structural lens may be of use to the researcher. The authors planned to examine the interactions between midwives and women at the 'epiphaneal' points of decision making during second-stage labour. It became clear that it was necessary to honour and thus incorporate feminist principles and values in their methodology. DATA SOURCES This paper draws on a recently completed PhD project to demonstrate the application of post-structural feminist interpretive Interactionism. Twenty six midwives representing each state and territory across Australia who were representative of every model of midwifery care offered in Australia were interviewed to gauge their experiences of what they believed represented good and poor case examples of decision making during second-stage labour. REVIEW METHODS The authors critique the philosophical underpinnings of interpretive Interactionism, and then modify these to acknowledge and incorporate post-structural and feminist ideologies. DISCUSSION Interpretive Interactionism is a useful methodology when the research question is best addressed by examining interactional processes and the meanings people make of them, especially if these occur at turning points in people's lives. Interpretive Interactionism methodology can and should be improved by taking account of issues of power, feminism and post-structural values. CONCLUSION Post-structural feminist interpretative Interactionism has much to offer healthcare researchers who want to develop methodologically robust findings. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE/RESEARCH Post-structural feminist interpretive Interactionism enables the researcher to be more cognisant of the complex social political and historical context of midwifery. Researchers using feminist and post-structural ideologies will enhance research findings when these tools are applied consciously and reflexively.
