Interactionist Perspective

The functionalist and conflict perspectives both analyze society at the macro level. These ap­proaches attempt to explain societywide patterns of behavior. However, many contemporary soci­ologists are more interested in understand­ing society as a whole through an examination of social interactions at the micro level—small groups, two friends casually talking with one an­other, a family, and so forth. The interactionist perspective generalizes about fundamental or everyday forms of social interaction. From these generalizations, interactionists seek to explain both macro- and micro-level behavior. Interac-tionism is a sociological framework for viewing human beings as living in a world of meaningful objects. These "objects" may include material things, actions, other people, relationships, and even symbols.

Focusing on the micro level permits interactionist researchers to better understand the larger society. For example, interactionists have studied the sometimes less-than-honest bargain­ing practices of automobile dealers and condo­minium salespeople. The researchers conclude that broad social and economic pressures on deal­ers and salespeople (such as the limited profit margins of car dealers) force some to employ dubious selling techniques.

George Herbert Mead (1863-1931) is widely regarded as the founder of the interactionist per­spective. Mead taught at the University of Chi­cago from 1893 until his death in 1931. Mead's sociological analysis, like that of Charles Horton Cooley, often focused on human interactions within one-to-one situations and small groups. Mead was interested in observing the most min­ute forms of communication—smiles, frowns, nodding of one's head—and in understanding how such individual behavior was influenced by the larger context of a group or society. However, despite his innovative views, Mead only occasion- ally wrote articles, and never a book. Most of his insights have been passed along to us through edited volumes of his lectures which his students published after his death.

Interactionists see symbols as an especially im­portant part of human communication. In fact, the interactionist perspective is sometimes re­ferred to as the symbolic interactionist perspective. Such researchers note that both a clenched fist and a salute have social meanings which are shared and understood by members of a society. In the United States, a salute symbolizes respect, while a clenched fist signifies defiance. However, in another culture different gestures might be used to convey a feeling of respect or defiance.

Let us examine how various societies might portray suicide without the use of words. Ameri­cans point a finger at the head (shooting), while urban Japanese bring a fist against the stomach (stabbing), and the South Fore of Papua, New Guinea, clench a hand at the throat (hanging).

These types of symbolic interaction are classified as forms of nonverbal communication, which can include many other gestures, facial expressions, and postures. The interactionist realizes the im­portance of nonverbal communication as a form of human behavior.

Since Mead's teachings have become well known, sociologists have expressed greater inter­est in the interactionist perspective. Many have moved away from what may have been an exces­sive preoccupation with the macro level of social behavior and have redirected their attention to­ward behavior which occurs in small groups. Er-ving Goffman (1922—1982) made a distinctive contribution by popularizing a particular type of interactionist method known as the dramaturgi­cal approach. The dramaturgist compares every­day life to the setting of the theater and stage. Just as actors present certain images, all of us seek to present particular features of our personalities while we hide other qualities. Thus, in a class, we may feel the need to project a serious image; at a party, it may seem important to look like a re­laxed and entertaining person.

As is shown in Box 1-3, the dramaturgical ap proach can even be applied in analyzing the be­havior of employment counselors in a program designed to locate jobs for welfare recipients. In a sense, such analysis is typical of the work of inter-actionists. These researchers find hidden social meanings in seemingly simple and unconscious human behaviors.

One of the most recently developed interac­tionist approaches is ethnomethodology, which fo­cuses on how people view, describe, and explain shared meanings underlying everyday social life and social routines. Harold Garfmkel (1967), who developed the ethnomethodological approach, had his students engage in experiments to see how breaking the unspoken rules of daily life can create confusion. For example, students were asked to address their parents as "Mr. " or "Mrs. ," which so disrupted family interactions that most students had to end the experiment after only a few minutes. Garfinkel asked other students to respond to the casual question "How are you?" with detailed accounts of their physical and mental health, their remain­ing homework, and even their sex lives. By dis­turbing social routines, ethnomethodologists can reveal and observe the underlying rules of every­day life.

Ethnomethodological studies have shown that when people have no comparable previous expe­rience to draw on in a decision-making situation, they will become extremely suggestible. For ex­ample, one recent study found that jurors are particularly likely to respond to the perceived opinions of the trial judge, rather than to the more conventional arguments offered by the opposing lawyers. Instead of trying to make a decision based on the merits of the case, jurors attempt to arrive at a verdict that they believe will meet with the judge's approval.