Self, Identity, and Interaction in an Ecology of Identities

  • Lynn Smith-Lovin
Chapter

Abstract

Arguably, one of the most significant theoretical accomplishments of the 1960’s was Sheldon Stryker’s (1968, 1980) linking of symbolic interactionist ideas with mainstream sociological concerns about social structure. In a sense, Stryker rescued the study of symbolic interaction from a somewhat counterproductive fascination with idiosyncratic, creative, atypical behavioral productions in ill-defined, unconstraining behavioral settings. He reasserted the ability of the basic symbolic interactionist principle—that society shapes self which then shapes social behavior—to inform a powerful theoretical view of how social structure and the individuals that exist within it effect and constitute one another. Following role theory in concentrating on the stable, reoccurring interactions in our social system, Stryker once again made social psychology relevant to the mainstream concerns of our discipline. By linking the role patterns with the internalized meanings that roles had for individuals, he provided the connection between social structure, meaning and action that drives structural symbolic interaction today.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Averett, C.P. & Heise, D.R. (1987). Modified social identities: Amalgamations, attributions, and emotions. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 13, 103–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, J, Cohen, B.P., & Zelditch, M Jr. 1972. Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37, 241–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blau, P.M. 1977. Inequality and Heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chaves, M., & Giesel, H. 2001. How should we study religious competition? Paper presented at the meetings of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
  5. Burke, P.J. 1991. Identity processes and social stress. American Sociological Review, 56, 836–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burke, P.J. & Franzoi, S.L. 1988. Studying situations and identities using experiential sampling methodology. American Sociological Review, 53, 559–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Childers, G.W., Mayhew, B.H. & Gray, L.N. 1971. System Size and Structural Differentiation in Military Organizations: Testing a Baseline Model of the Division of Labor American Journal of Sociology, 76, 813–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heise, D.R. 1979. Understanding Events: Affect and the Construction of Social Action. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Heise, D.R. 1990. Affect control theory: A technical appendix. Pp. 270–280 in T.D. Kemper (ed.), Research Agendas in Emotions, New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  10. Heise D.R. & Britt L. 2000. In Identity, Self and Social Movements, edited by S. Stryker, T. Owens and R. White. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  11. Kasarda, J.D. 1974. The Structural Implications of Social System Size:A Three-Level Analysis. American Sociological Review, 39, 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. MacKinnon, N.J. 1994. Symbolic Interaction as Affect Control. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mark, N. 1998a. Birds of a Feather Sing Together. Social Forces, 77, 455–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mark, N. 1998b. An ecology of culture. Doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
  15. Mayhew, B.H. 1974. Baseline models of system structure. American Sociological Review, 39, 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayhew, B.H. 1983. Hierarchical differentiation in imperatively coordinated systems. Pp. 153–229 in Research in the Sociology of Organizations edited by S. Bacharach. Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  17. Mayhew, B.H., James, T.F. & Childers, G.W. 1972. System size and structural differentiation in military organizations: Testing a harmonic series model of the division of labor. American Journal of Sociology, 77, 750–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mayhew, B.H. & Levinger, R.L. 1976. Size and the density of interaction in human aggregates. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 86–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mayhew, B.H., Levinger, R.L., McPherson, J.M. & James, T.F. 1972. System size and structural differentiation in formal organizations:A baseline generator for two major theoretical propositions. American Sociological Review, 37, 629–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McPherson, J.M. 1983. An ecology of affiliation. American Sociological Review, 48, 519–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McPherson, J.M. 1999. Modeling change in fields of organizations: Some simulation results, In Ilgen, D. and Hulin, C. (Eds.) Computational Modeling of Behavioral Processes in Organizations. American Psychological Association Press.Google Scholar
  22. McPherson M, Popilearz, P.A. & Drobnic S. 1992. Social networks and organizational dynamics. American Sociological Review, 57, 153–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McPherson, J.M. & Ranger-Moore, J.R. 1991. Evolution on a dancing landscape: Organizations and networks in dynamic Blau space, Social Forces, 70, 19–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McPherson, J.M. & Rotolo, T. 1996. Testing a dynamic model of social composition: Diversity and change in voluntary groups. American Sociological Review, 61, 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McPherson, M. & Smith-Levin, L. 1986. Sex segregation in voluntary associations. American Sociological Review, 51, 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McPherson, M. & Smith-Lovin, L. 1987. Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of facetoface groups. American Sociological Review, 52, 370–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McPherson, M & Smith-Levin L. 2002. “Cohesion and membershipduration: Linkinggroups, relations and individuals in an ecology of affiliation.” Pp. xx in S. Thye and E. Lawler, Advances in Group Processes, JAI Press.Google Scholar
  28. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L. & Cook, J. 2001. “Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mirowsky, J, & Ross, C. 1995. Sex differences in distress: Real or artifact?” American Sociological Review, 60, 449–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Osgood, C.E., May, W.H., & Miron, M.S. 1975. Cross-cultural universals of affective meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  31. Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.C., & Tannenbaum, P.H. 1957. The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  32. Popielarz, P. & McPherson, M. 1995. On the edge or in between: Niche position. niche overlap and the duration of voluntary association memberships. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 698–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Powers, W. T. 1973. Behavior: The control of perception. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  34. Ridgeway, C. 1991. The social construction of status value: Gender and other nominal characteristics. Social Forces, 70, 367–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ridgeway, C. & Smith-Lovin, L. 1994. Structure, culture and interaction: A comparison of affect control theory and expectations states theory. Advances in Group Processes, Vol. 11, JAI Press.Google Scholar
  36. Robinson, D.T.,& Smith-Lovin, L. 1992. Selective interaction as a strategy for identity maintenance: An affect control model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rotolo, T., & McPherson, J.M. 2001. The system of occupations: Modeling occupations in sociodemographic space. Social Forces, 79, 1095–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Serpe, R.T. 1987. Stability and change in self: A structural symbolic interactionist explanation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith-Levin, L. 2002. Role-identities, action and emotion: parallel processing and the production of mixed emotions. In Kashima, Y., Foddy, M. & Platow, M. (Eds.), Self and Identity: Personal. Social, and Symbolic. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Smith-Levin, L. 2000. “Social psychology.” In J. Blau (ed.), Blackwell companion to sociology Maiden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  41. Smith-Lovin, L. 1990. “Emotion as confirmation and disconfirmation of identity: An affect control model.” Pp. 238–270 in T.D. Kemper (ed.), Research agendas in emotions. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  42. Smith-Levin, L. 1987. Impressions from events. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 13, 35–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith-Levin, L. & Heise, D.R. 1988 Affect Control Theory: Research Advances. New York: Wiley InterscienceGoogle Scholar
  44. Stets, J.E. 1995. Role identities and person identities: Gender identity, mastery identity and controlling one’s partner. Sociological Perspectives, 38, 129–50.Google Scholar
  45. Stets, J.E. & Burke, P.J. 1996. Gender, control and interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 193–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stryker, S. 1968. Identity salience and role performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 4, 558–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stryker, S. 1980. Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Cummings.Google Scholar
  48. Stryker, S. 2000. Identity competition: Key to differential social movement involvement.” In Identity, Self and Social Movements. edited by S. Stryker, T. Owens and R. White. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  49. Stryker, S. & Burke P. J. 2000. The past, present and future of identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 284–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stryker, S. & Serpe, R.T. 1982. Commitment, identity salience and role behavior: A theory and research example. Pp. 199–218 in Personality. Roles and Social Behavior, edited by W. Ickes and Eric S Knowles. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  51. Stryker, S. & Statham, A. 1985. Symbolic interaction and role theory. Pp. 311–78 in Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by G. Lindzey and E. Aronson. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  52. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.” Pp. 33–47 in W. G. Austin and S. Worchel, (Eds.), The Social Psychology of lntergroup Relations. Monterey CA: Brooks-Cole.Google Scholar
  53. Tsushima, T. & Burke, P.J. 1999. Levels,agency and control in the parent identity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62, 173–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thoits, P.A. 1983. Multiple identities and psychological well-bring. American Sociological Review, 49, 174–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thoits, P.A. 1986. Multiple identities: Examining gender and marital status differences in distress. American Sociological Review, 51, 259–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Turner, J.C. 1985. Social categorization and the self-concept: Asocial cognitive theory of group behavior,” Pp. 77–122 in E.J. Lawler (ed.), Advances in Group Processes, Vol. 2. Greenwich, CT: JAI PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynn Smith-Lovin
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of ArizonaTucson
  2. 2.Duke UniversityDurham

Personalised recommendations