Catherine Konold 1
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
Symbolic Interaction is a utilitarian keystone of sociology was developed by students of
George Herbert Mead at the University of Chicago after his death in 1931. Although originally a
philosopher, Professor Mead’s legacy proved to be a valuable tool in sociology. This theory
places a great importance on language as a symbol. Mead reasoned that language is what allows
us to become self conscious beings – aware of our own individuality (Gidden). Since
development, the theory has drawn criticism from multiple sources; despite few drawbacks, it is
a robust and well-defined theory.
Mead’s intellectual approach takes after those of John Dewey and William James. These
pragmatists held revolutionary ontological beliefs for their time. They contended that reality is
dynamic and the arbitrary meaning given to symbols is created through interaction. Dewey and
James wanted to contribute to society by using the critical approach. Researchers have found it
helpful to group the concepts into two separate schools. The Chicago and Iowa schools are the
two main branches of the theory (Richard West). They differ in epistemological approaches.
According to Mead and Herbert Blumer, human beings could not be studied the way most other
things are. Human beings have free will, the ability to think abstractly, and multilayered
emotional responses. They are creative and able to adapt rapidly over time. In order to study
human communication effectively, the Chicago school employed a research method that relied
on case studies, histories and interviews. Manford Kuhn was the Iowa State University professor
who synthesized the second branch. Professor Kuhn wrote that, “The key ideas of symbolic
interaction could be operationalized and unitized successfully in empirical research” (1964).
Catherine Konold 2
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
Kuhn and his students developed questionnaires, tests and measureable ways to quantify data.
Later, Carl Couch led a neo-Iowa school movement and studied behavior on videotape. He
published Researching Social Processes in the Laboratory in 1987.
Symbolic interaction is a grand theory. Its principles are intended to explain all human
communication behavior. Let’s take a closer look at symbolic interaction (SI) and the underlying
mechanics.
One of the first key concepts in SI is the importance of meaning as a motivation for
human behavior. The goal of interaction itself is to create shared meaning (Richard West). There
are three manifestations of that statement. 1) Humans act toward others on the basis of the
meanings those others have for them 2) Meaning is created in interaction between people 3)
Meaning is modified through an interpretive process. These are nominal concepts. The scope
allows for radical interpretation of the individuals understanding; it claims that perceptions create
reality. This stems from ideas expressed by John Dewey and William James. It can be said that
the scope of SI is highly interpretive.
This shared meaning derived from interaction is what our sense of self is made of. In fact,
Mead argued that it is impossible to have a sense of self without the meaning derived from social
interaction. This idea has been challenged multiple times in sociology. The famous case of Genie
Wiley was one such attempt to disprove this theory (Gidden).
Genie was rescued from a deprived environment in 1970. Scientists were fascinated with
her because they finally had a chance to prove that socialization creates a sense of self. At the
time, she was unable to speak. She briefly progressed while living at the Children’s Hospital of
UCLA. She was studied mercilessly, but scientific efforts remained fruitless and never proved
Catherine Konold 3
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
that a sense of self can exist without interaction. Eventually, her caregivers argued over money
and what should be done with her. She was seen as a symbol of hope and progress; but seemed
that all best intentions had been forgotten. Genie, now 51, regressed and stopped talking. That
sounds pretty concerning, but I think that Genie was smart and never saw the need for speech.
After all, the socialized people around her set a bad example. "We fumbled the ball," James
Kent, a consulting psychologist for the Victims of Crime program in California and Genie's
psychologist told ABCNEWS.com. "We had the opportunity to allow more of her potential. It
was as much out of ignorance as disagreements."
The sense of self is defined by what meanings we attach to the symbols in our life. Selfconcepts are important because they provide an important motive for behavior. I don’t think
Genie had a self-concept, but I do think she could create symbols by association. Going further, I
will examine Roger Thomas’ experience [Roger Thomas, p. 76. (Richard West)]. He has a
complex sense of self. What’s more, he has the ability to separate the way he sees himself versus
the way others see him. In other words, Roger has both an objective self and a subjective self
(Berger). The subjective self relates to experience and deals with the perceived nature of reality.
It manifests from consciousness of one’s surroundings. The objective self is influenced by the
perceptions of others.
Roger is able to use inductive reasoning to predict how others will treat him based on his
past experiences. Roger practices anticipatory socialization. Anticipatory socialization refers to
the processes of socialization in which a person "rehearses" for future positions, occupations, and
social relationships (Long). Robert prepares himself by imitating the behaviors of a successful
engineer. The exact behaviors of ‘successful engineer’ will vary depending on the culture, age
group, gender, and other restrictions of the setting. This shows that it is based upon a perceived
Catherine Konold 4
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
meaning assigned to the role. Roger also assumes that because he is the youngest employee, he
must be the least experienced as well. Notice how he assigned a meaning to an otherwise
ambiguous factor. According to Mead, meaning can exist only when people share common
interpretations of the symbols they use in interaction (Richard West). Meanings are “social
products” that are formed through the defining activities of people as they interact (Richard
West). When feeling unsure of himself, Robert thinks of his parent’s encouraging words. He
feels that he can succeed because they believe in him.
The Pygmalion effect is closely related to a self-fulfilling prophecy, but the methodology
differs. When a person behaves in order to live up to someone else’s expectations, it is called the
Pygmalion effect. The self-fulfilling prophecy occurs when someone expects to perform a certain
way, and then their actions align to make the outcome happen. It would cause a significant
amount of cognitive dissonance if the Pygmalion effect and self-fulfilling prophecy did not
equalize outcomes. Roger predicts that he will be treated well by his employer because an old
professor said he was a good student. This sets Roger up in a self-fulfilling prophecy. Then
again, perhaps he will perform well to make his old professor proud; as in the Pygmalion effect.
It is easy to dissect and identify the concepts of SI in my own life as well. The key
concepts of SI are detailed in Mind, Self, and Society (Mead). Interaction forms a basis for our
inner thought process. I find it easy to use shared symbols as an advantage in communication. I
can sometimes read people and I might adjust how I’m talking based on their background or
culture, in order to find common symbols that illustrate my point. I also use SI everyday in my
inner dialogue. I use what I think other people think of certain symbols to derive meaning. I
theorize that the actions which develop from those thoughts will therefore be in line with what
others think. Although I am free to act based on my own meanings for symbols, I have found that
Catherine Konold 5
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
it is easier to use other’s definitions instead. Therefore, I agree with Mead’s claim that people are
not capable of inner conversations or sustained thought without interaction from others. (Richard
West). Mead’s definition of mind also includes a practice called role-taking. Role-taking refers
to the process of imagining what another person’s perception must be like. I do this as well.
When I figure out what someone else thinks of a symbol, I am practicing role-taking. When I
imagine what my boss and co-workers think of me, it is role-taking as well. I use role-taking a lot
when I am sympathizing with someone. It is not done for emotional purpose, but understanding
how they see a situation helps me understand what they need to hear; that’s how I know what to
say!
In my personal life, I sometimes define myself based on what others think, as Mead
would suggest. I tend to only weigh the perception of others when I am considering a risky
endeavor with a considerable loss at stake. For example, I will soon be running for a chairperson
position within a local council. When I do my campaign speech, you can bet I won’t take
comfort in ‘being myself’. Rather, I have systematically studied what my voters want in a
chairperson; all I have to do is embody all those characteristics and they will think I’m the one.
Sometimes defining my sense of self by the perceptions of others is a bad thing. I once had a job
where my boss and a few co-workers thought I was stupid. They didn’t want to invest time
training me because they thought I was too stupid to learn anything new. I worked as hard as I
could, and cared about my job, but there was never any advancement. After a while, I figured
that I should stop fighting it and just let them think I was dumb. Eventually, this began to creep
into my actual self esteem and I recognized a problem. I knew I wasn’t stupid. So, I quit my job
and got another. At the new job, I excelled quickly and my managers gave me a raise within the
first week. I was praised, paid more, and given more responsibility. The new job didn’t change
Catherine Konold 6
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
the way I thought – It simply provided interaction with others which confirmed my beliefs. I am
pretty smart after all. I only find my looking glass self when there is something to gain or lose. In
family or social situations where there is no risk, I rarely feel a need to define myself by the way
others see me.
Common Criticisms of SI
I do not believe that someone can have a sense of self without social interaction. The self
does not become separate from the environment without communication. A person raised by an
animal would not have a sense of self in the conventional definition. A person raised by an
animal would not be able to interpret their experience based on interactions with other people.
They would be conscious but that is different. Therefore, a fully un-socialized human being
would not have a sense of self by this definition.
I do agree with the emphasis that Mead places on language as a shared symbol system.
Some people would dispute this concept by claiming that it is possible for people to
communicate without language. I disagree. Communication without language would rely entirely
on nonverbal gestures and expressions. It is known that different cultures have different
nonverbal gestures as well. Even road signs without words cannot transverse cultural rifts. I
contend that it would be impossible to communicate effectively without the shared symbol
system provided by language. There are so many symbols in the US, for example, that we take
for granted and it takes effort to imagine what it would be like without them. I will cite an
example from my old sociology professor, Axana King. After moving to the US from Russia, she
would often see images of a large yellow vehicle but didn’t know what it was. At first glance,
Catherine Konold 7
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
she thought it was an ambulance. However, the large yellow vehicle turned out to be a school
bus
1. SI has received criticism because it places too much emphasis on individual action and
not enough emphasis on the constraints on individuals that they cannot think their way
out of. I however, do not agree with the points made in that argument. I think that the
emphasis placed on individual action is what makes SI a great theory. Emphasis on
individual action does not prevent SI from being useful. Discuss Roger Thomas’s initial
reactions to his new job in Houston. How to they specifically relate to his sense of
self?
Roger is able to use inductive reasoning to predict how others will treat him based on his
past experiences. Roger practices anticipatory socialization. Anticipatory socialization refers to
the processes of socialization in which a person "rehearses" for future positions, occupations, and
social relationships(Long). When uncomfortable, Robert copes by mimicking the behaviors of a
successful engineer. The exact behaviors of ‘successful engineer’ will vary depending on the
culture, age group, gender, and other restrictions of the setting. An African American female in
Japan who is an engineer might try to embody significantly different qualities. This shows that it
is based upon a perceived meaning assigned to the role. Roger also assumes that because he is
the youngest employee, he must be the least experienced as well. Notice how he assigned a
meaning to an otherwise ambiguous factor. According to Mead, meaning can exist only when
people share common interpretations of the symbols they use in interaction (Richard West).
Meanings are “social products” that are formed through the defining activities of people as they
interact (Richard West).
Catherine Konold 8
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
2. Do you believe Mead’s argument that one cannot have a self without social
interaction? Would a person raised by an animal, for example, have one sense of
self? Explain your answers.
I do not believe that someone can have a sense of self without social interaction. The self
does not become separate from the environment without communication. A person raised by an
animal would not have a sense of self in the conventional definition. A person raised by an
animal would not be able to interpret their experience based on interactions with other people.
They would be conscious but that is different. Therefore, a fully un-socialized human being
would not have a sense of self by this definition.
4. Do you agree with the emphasis that Mead places on languages as a shared symbol
system? Is it possible to interact with someone who speaks a completely different language?
Explain your position.
I do agree with the emphasis that Mead places on language as a shared symbol system.
Some people would dispute this concept by claiming that it is possible for people to interact
without language. I disagree. Only instinctual, primal things can be communicated without
language. A punch in the face, for example, would have the same effect regardless of culture.
The type of communication we are talking about cannot be done without the arbitrary meanings
assigned to words. Interaction without language would rely entirely on nonverbal gestures and
expressions. It is known that different cultures have different nonverbal gestures as well. Even
road signs without words cannot transverse cultural rifts. I contend that it would be impossible to
Catherine Konold 9
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
interact effectively without the shared symbol system provided by language. There are so many
symbols in the US, for example, that we take for granted and it takes effort to imagine what it
would be like without them. I will cite an example from my old sociology professor, Axana
King. After moving to the US from Russia, she would often see images of a large yellow vehicle
but didn’t know what it was. At first glance, she thought it was an ambulance. However, the
large yellow vehicle turned out to be a school bus. If small pieces of cultural knowledge seem
alien to us, imagine how hard it would be to understand to larger concepts, especially without
language.
5. One of the criticisms of Symbolic Interaction Theory is that it puts too much
emphasis on individual action and not enough emphasis on the constraints on individuals
that they cannot think their way out of. What is your position on this criticism?
SI has received criticism because it places too much emphasis on individual action and
not enough emphasis on the constraints on individuals that they cannot think their way out of. I
however, do not agree with the points made in that argument. I think that the emphasis placed on
individual action is what makes SI a great theory. Emphasis on individual action does not
prevent SI from being useful.
6. Explain the difference between the concepts of self-fulfilling prophecy and
Pygmalion effect. How are they similar? How are they different?
The Pygmalion effect is closely related to a self-fulfilling prophecy, but the methodology
differs. When a person behaves in order to live up to someone else’s expectations, it is called the
Pygmalion effect. The self-fulfilling prophecy occurs when someone expects to perform a certain
way, and then their actions align to make the outcome happen. It would cause a significant
Catherine Konold 10
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
amount of cognitive dissonance if the Pygmalion effect and self-fulfilling prophecy did not
equalize outcomes. Roger predicts that he will be treated well by his employer because an old
professor said he was a good student. This sets Roger up in a self-fulfilling prophecy. Then
again, perhaps he will perform well to make his old professor proud; as in the Pygmalion effect.
7. Do you agree that Mead’s theory is too broad in scope to really be considered a theory?
Explain your answer.
I believe that Mead’s theory is too broad – but not too broad to be considered a theory. I think it
is still a theory by definition because of how useful it is. Additionally, SI is still being analyzed, improved
and tested. I think that the evolution of SI justifies its shortcomings. Besides, it is considered a grand
theory and so the criticism of its broadness has no foundation.
Works Cited
Berger, Kathleen Stassen. Invitation to the Life Span. New York City: Worth Publishers, 2010.
Gidden, Duneier, Appelbaum, Carr. Essentials of Sociology3rd edition. New York: Norton, 2011.
Textbook.
Konold, Catherine. https://catherinekonold.wordpress.com/sociology-1010-2/sociology-1010/. 2011.
February 2015.
Long, Russ. http://dmc122011.delmar.edu/socsci/rlong/intro/social.htm. 15 May 2012. html. February
2015.
Mead, George Herbert. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1934.
Catherine Konold 11
Analysis of the Symbolic Interaction Theory in Practice
Richard West, Lynn Turner. Introducing Communication Theory 4th edition. New York: McGraw Hill,
2010. Textbook.