The Experts below are selected from a list of 288 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Gary Alan Fine - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Sad Demise, Mysterious Disappearance, and Glorious Triumph of Symbolic Interactionism
Annual Review of Sociology, 1993Co-Authors: Gary Alan FineAbstract:Symbolic Interactionism has changed over the past two decades, both in the issues that practitioners examine and in its position within the discipline. Once considered adherents of a marginal oppositional perspective, confronting the dominant positivist, quantitative approach of mainstream sociology, Symbolic interactionists find now that many of their core concepts have been accepted. Simultaneously their core as an intellectual community has been weakened by the diversity of interests of those who self-identify with the perspective. I examine here four processes that led to these changes: fragmentation, expansion, incorporation, and adoption. I then describe the role of Symbolic Interactionism in three major debates confronting the discipline: the micro/macro debate, the structure/agency debate, and the social realist/interpretivist debate. I discuss six empirical arenas in which interactionists have made major research contributions: social coordination theory, the sociology of emotions, social constructionism, self and identity theory, macro-Interactionism, and policy-relevant research. I conclude by speculating about the future role of Interactionism.
-
the sad demise mysterious disappearance and glorious triumph of Symbolic Interactionism
Review of Sociology, 1993Co-Authors: Gary Alan FineAbstract:Symbolic Interactionism has changed over the past two decades, both in the issues that practitioners examine and in its position within the discipline. Once considered adherents of a marginal oppositional perspective, confronting the dominant positivist, quantitative approach of mainstream sociology, Symbolic interactionists find now that many of their core concepts have been accepted. Simultaneously their core as an intellectual community has been weakened by the diversity of interests of those who self-identify with the perspective. I examine here four processes that led to these changes: fragmentation, expansion, incorporation, and adoption. I then describe the role of Symbolic Interactionism in three major debates confronting the discipline: the micro/macro debate, the structure/agency debate, and the social realist/interpretivist debate. I discuss six empirical arenas in which interactionists have made major research contributions: social coordination theory, the sociology of emotions, social constru...
Sandro Segre - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
howard s becker s Symbolic Interactionism
The American Sociologist, 2019Co-Authors: Sandro SegreAbstract:Even though Howard S. Becker has consistently declined to be labeled in any other way but as a sociologist, he has made numerous statements that evidence his methodological and epistemological proximity to Symbolic Interactionism. Participant observation is Becker’s research method of choice. Becker’s insistence that sociologists should interpret and confer meaning to situations, accords with some basic principles of Symbolic Interactionism. So does his recommendation to avoid generalizations that are not context-bound. On the other hand, Becker’s Symbolic Interactionism departs both from standard accounts of Symbolic Interactionism, and Stryker’s version of it, in that it makes use of notions of its own, such as social world, structures of interaction, conventions, and interpretive communities. Becker’s appreciation of Blumer, finally, is explicitly stated. It is limited, however, by some fundamental reservations that concern Blumer’s conceptual and theoretical system, and his research method.
-
Howard S. Becker’s Symbolic Interactionism
The American Sociologist, 2019Co-Authors: Sandro SegreAbstract:Even though Howard S. Becker has consistently declined to be labeled in any other way but as a sociologist, he has made numerous statements that evidence his methodological and epistemological proximity to Symbolic Interactionism. Participant observation is Becker’s research method of choice. Becker’s insistence that sociologists should interpret and confer meaning to situations, accords with some basic principles of Symbolic Interactionism. So does his recommendation to avoid generalizations that are not context-bound. On the other hand, Becker’s Symbolic Interactionism departs both from standard accounts of Symbolic Interactionism, and Stryker’s version of it, in that it makes use of notions of its own, such as social world, structures of interaction, conventions, and interpretive communities. Becker’s appreciation of Blumer, finally, is explicitly stated. It is limited, however, by some fundamental reservations that concern Blumer’s conceptual and theoretical system, and his research method.
-
A Note on Max Weber’s Reception on the Part of Symbolic Interactionism, and its Theoretical Consequences
The American Sociologist, 2014Co-Authors: Sandro SegreAbstract:The overall reception of Max Weber on the part of Symbolic Interactionism is marked by a lack of consideration, or by perfunctory mention, or by critical rejection. To the extent that Weber’s work has been considered at all, attention has been devoted to his notion of Verstehen, variously appraised, rather than to other Weberian categories. This paper is an attempt to reconsider Weber’s potential contribution to Symbolic Interactionism in a more positive light. To this end, the Weberian categories of Verstehen and consensual action have been related, with particular reference to Blumer (1969), to those of meaningful interaction and definition of the situation. A discussion of status groups, as Weber and representatives of Symbolic Interactionism have defined and discussed them, should bring into light the potential relevance of Weber for this theoretical perspective.
-
a note on max weber s reception on the part of Symbolic Interactionism and its theoretical consequences
The American Sociologist, 2014Co-Authors: Sandro SegreAbstract:The overall reception of Max Weber on the part of Symbolic Interactionism is marked by a lack of consideration, or by perfunctory mention, or by critical rejection. To the extent that Weber’s work has been considered at all, attention has been devoted to his notion of Verstehen, variously appraised, rather than to other Weberian categories. This paper is an attempt to reconsider Weber’s potential contribution to Symbolic Interactionism in a more positive light. To this end, the Weberian categories of Verstehen and consensual action have been related, with particular reference to Blumer (1969), to those of meaningful interaction and definition of the situation. A discussion of status groups, as Weber and representatives of Symbolic Interactionism have defined and discussed them, should bring into light the potential relevance of Weber for this theoretical perspective.
James A. Forte - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Symbolic Interactionism and Social Work: A Forgotten Legacy, Part 1:
Families in society-The journal of contemporary social services, 2020Co-Authors: James A. ForteAbstract:Social workers have forgotten their interactionist ancestors. This article is the first installment in a 2- part series designed to remedy this amnesia. Part 1 introduces the tradition of applied Symbolic Interactionism and reports on the historical and exemplary partnerships between social workers and interactionists. Part 1 also reviews the social work use of Symbolic Interactionism in the areas of human behavior theory and practice with varied size social systems. Part 2 reviews interactionist contributions to social work in varied fields of practice, to social policy and welfare, to research, and to professional education. An appraisal of the social work use of the interactionist legacy and a summary of resources from within and outside North America for revitalizing the partnership are also provided in Part 2.
-
Symbolic Interactionism and Social Work: A Forgotten Legacy, Part 2
Families in society-The journal of contemporary social services, 2020Co-Authors: James A. ForteAbstract:Social workers have forgotten their interactionist ancestors. This article is the second installment in a 2-part series designed to remedy this amnesia. Part 1 introduced the tradition of applied Symbolic Interactionism, reported on historical partnerships, and reviewed the social work use of Symbolic Interactionism as behavior theory and as a framework for helping varied size social systems. Part 2 reviews interactionist contributions to social work in varied fields of practice, to social policy and welfare, to research, and to professional education. The author argues that the time is opportune for reconciliation between justice-oriented social workers and critically minded interactionists. An appraisal of the social work use of the interactionist legacy and a summary of resources from within and outside North America for revitalizing this partnership are also provided.
Joye C Gordon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
interpreting definitions of public relations self assessment and a Symbolic Interactionism based alternative
Public Relations Review, 1997Co-Authors: Joye C GordonAbstract:Abstract This article reviews several popular definitions of public relations and explicates the shared elements and assumptions inherent in these definitions. Further, the article presents an alternative conceptualization of public relations based upon Herbert Blumer's Symbolic Interactionism. The purpose of this essay is to stimulate questioning and self assessment as well as to introduce alternative goals, ideals, and directions for the field of public relations.
Gil Richard Musolf - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
William James and Symbolic Interactionism
Sociological focus, 1994Co-Authors: Gil Richard MusolfAbstract:Abstract James has been ignored by many interactionists. Yet, he is a primary source of conceptualizations in Symbolic Interactionism (SI). The social and ideological context of James's ideas as well as James's chief contributions to SI are presented, beginning with his association with functional psychology. An argument is made that contemporary interactionists have a rich source of ideas in James. Dewey and Mead, James's immediate successors, were able to expand upon James, fully developing the idea of socialization as the basis of human behavior. They also applied James's pragmatic ideas to social reform.
-
Structure, Institutions, Power, and Ideology: New Directions Within Symbolic Interactionism
Sociological Quarterly, 1992Co-Authors: Gil Richard MusolfAbstract:Responding to a fusillade of criticism in the 1970s, interactionists made numerous studies to accentuate the structural elements of constraint. This reconstruction of Symbolic Interactionism (SI) h...
