Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology

2014 Edition
| Editors: Thomas Teo

Symbolic Interactionism

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_472

Introduction

Psychologists have frequently ignored the sociological approach known as “Symbolic Interactionism” even though the study of everyday life interaction and exchange is an important aspect of social psychology, and no critical psychology can afford to ignore the interactionist dimension of human lived experience. Anthropological and sociological insights concerning various aspects of the general phenomenon of symbolic interaction such as ritual and inequalities are useful for critical psychologist open to other paradigms, especially research paradigms which are not narrowly empiricist or rigidly “positivistic.”

Definition

As indicated, the term “symbolic interaction” can refer to the object of study as well as the theoretical and methodological approach to that subject matter. Sometimes the phenomenon is differentiated from the research paradigm by the use of capitalization for the theory. That practice is helpful, but it is not universal. Rather than examine relatively...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Athens, L. (2011). Interactionism: The growing threat of intellectual extinction. In N. Denzin, L. Athens, & T. Faust (Eds.), Studies in symbolic interactionism, blue ribbon papers (Vol. 36, pp. 1–16). Bingley, UK: Emerald publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Bakker, J. I., & Bakker, T. (2006). The club dj: A semiotic and interactionist analysis. Symbolic Interaction, 29(1), 71–82.Google Scholar
  3. Bakker, J. I. (Hans). (2007). Definition of the situation. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology (Vol. III, pp. 991–992).Google Scholar
  4. Blumer, H. (2004). George Herbert Mead and human conduct. In T. J. Morrione (Ed.), George Herbert Mead and human conduct. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  5. Mead, G. H. (1936). Movements of thought in the nineteenth century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Mead, G. H. (1982). The individual and the social self: Unpublished work of G. H. Mead. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Simmel, G. (1978). The philosophy of money (T. Bottomore & D. Frisby Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  8. Simmel, G. (1980). Essays in interpretation in social science. In G. Oakes (Ed. & Trans.), Essays in interpretation in social science. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield. (First published in German in 1900).Google Scholar
  9. Thomas, W. I. (1923). The unadjusted girl, with cases and standpoint for behaviour analysis. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  10. Wiley, N. (1994). The semiotic self. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Wiley, N. (2011). The Chicago school: A political interpretation. In N. Denzin, L. Athens, & T. Faust (Eds.), Studies in symbolic interactionism, blue ribbon papers (Vol. 36, pp. 39–74). Bingley, UK: Emerald publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology and AnthropologyUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada