Understanding Everyday Life: A Critical Interactionist Approach to Social Psychology (Syllabus 2008)
UNDERSTANDING EVERYDAY
LIFE:
A CRITICAL
INTERACTIONIST APPROACH TO SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
OUR SUBJECT MATTER – SOCIAL
PSYCHOLOGY
Social Psychology is a very broad topic
concerned with many aspects of human behavior. I see it as
representing some of the greatest wisdom about the human species as
distilled through the ages. It is one of the social sciences, along
with anthropology, political science, economics, sociology,
psychology, human geography, ethnic studies, women’s studies,
criminology, etc. All of these disciplines seek to understand the
complexity of the human condition. While solid lines of demarcation
may have at one time separated these academic disciplines, that is no
longer the case. We live in an age of blurred genres and
interdisciplinarity.
Social Psychology is centrally
concerned with interpersonal relationships and processes. It
examines the reciprocal relationship between individual selves and
society—how does society influence the individual and how do
individuals influence society. Perhaps “influence” is too weak a
word. Later we will conceive of society as produced and reproduced
in concrete instances of social activity through mundane
interactional and interpretive processes and procedures.
Social psychology is actually two
distinct yet overlapping fields of study. It exists at the
intersection of sociology and psychology, and draws upon both
disciplines, as well as other social scientific approaches. The ways
that social psychology developed in sociology and psychology are very
different, yet the topics they explore are often similar.
Some of the differences are
methodological. Psychological social psychology is more
“quantitative”, meaning that the data the studies are concerned
with are quantified, or turned into numbers. Psychological social
psychology usually tests cause and effect relationships in laboratory
settings. As with psychology as a discipline, psychological social
psychology is more concerned with the appearance of rigor,
reliability, and validity. Psychology argues that it is more
“legitimate” and “statistically valid”. Sociology believes
that knowledge without meaning is worthless, and has probably solved
more “real issues”.
Sociological social psychology is much
more concerned with becoming a “natural observational science”
(Sacks 1984). For me, this means that researchers are more likely to
use observational research methods, such as ethnography (also called
fieldwork, or participant observation) and the use of video and audio
recordings of “naturally occurring settings”. Of course, these
are generalizations and many counter-examples could be located.
Subject matters are also distinct.
Psychologically-oriented social psychologists emphasize the
individual in society and their sociologically-oriented brethren
emphasize the structure of society itself. Other differences exist.
In their book Two Social
Psychologies, Stephan and Stephan argued that:
Psychological Social Psychology:
- Attempts to understand and explain how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others (Gordon Allport’s famous definition)
- Social influence at the individual level
Sociological Social Psychology:
- Concerned with social experience stemming from individuals’ participation in social groups
- Interaction with others
- The effects of cultural environment on both social experience and interactions with others
- The emergence of social structure from these interactions
Both approaches have contributed
important understandings about the nature of everyday social life.
Our emphasis will be on sociological social psychology. In
particular we will forge a “critical interactionist” perspective,
drawing upon several “micro” sociological approaches, including
symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, and other action-oriented
approaches.
Micro-Sociology: The Social
Psychology of Everyday Life
|
“Social life is part of every individual and every
interaction, not only of the large-scale affairs of governments,
economics, and complex organizations. Sociology that focuses
primarily on persons and interpersonal relations is called
“micro-sociology” (Calhoun, Gerteis, Moody, Pfaff, Virk 2007,
p 25). |
Another way to differentiate social
psychology is to draw attention to the scale of its research
concerns. “Macrosociology” is usually defined as examining the
broader structures, social institutions, and global and historical
processes of social life. In general, functionalism, systems
theories, Marxism and other conflict theories are regarded as
macrosociology, whilst symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology and
exchange theory are regarded as microsociological.
Of course, not all sociology is on one
side or the other, and the history of sociology can be seen as an
ongoing dialogue between system-level researchers and agent-level
researchers, and the best of social theory, including Marx, Weber,
Durkheim, Simmel, have found sophisticated ways to address this
tension.
Calhoun et al. (2007) state that
microsociology is characterized by three elements:
- the “emphasis on the face-to-face social interaction of human agents rather than on the workings of the social system as an abstract entity” (2007: 26);
- the “emphasis on meanings rather than functions” (p. 27);
- the emphasis on “lived experience rather than an abstracted (or reified) concept of “society” (p. 27).
There are several major
microsociological approaches.
- Symbolic interactionism developed on the basis of the work of George Herbert Mead, and was heavily influence by Herbert Blumer. The key idea here is meaning—people act in any situation based on the meaning, or “definition of the situation”, they have of that situation.
- Social Phenomenology, or social constructionism, emphasizes close observation of human experience and the ways that basic categories of understanding are formed. Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann’s book The Social Construction of Reality (1966) emphasizes the socially created nature of social life. As they state: “Society is a human product. Society is an objective reality. Man is a social product.”
- Ethnomethodology is a term coined by Harold Garfinkel to describe his approach to analyzing the methods people use in everyday life to make sense of their practical actions. Ethnomethodology was initially influenced by the phenomenology of Alfred Schutz.
- Conversation analysis emerged out of ethnomethodology and still draws significant inspiration from this approach. It has developed a rigorously empirical approach to examining “talk-in-interaction”, and has produced detailed studies of a wide variety of situated actions, often focusing on the sequential organization of talk and nonvocal actions. It was pioneered by the work of Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson.
- Erving Goffman produced a very influential microsociological approach to studying face-to-face social interactions. Almost single-handedly, he opened up for investigation the systematic nature of “the interaction order”. Drawing upon Emile Durkheim’s social theory, Goffman demonstrated that much of interaction is ritualized in ways that reinforce the social order and prevent it from becoming disruptive. His “dramaturgical” approach examined the presentation of self in everyday life—that is how we show ourselves to others strategically.
Dramaturgy is an approach to social analysis in which an
analogy is drawn between everyday life and the theatre. Social
action is regarded as a “performance” in which actors play parts,
and stage-manage their actions, seeking to shape the impressions they
convey to others (impression management).
During the 1980s, much theorizing
revolved around the so-called “micro-macro link”, and significant
attention was devoted to exploring how to synthesize these somewhat
distinct forms of sociological analysis. Anthony Giddens’ theory
of structuration emerged as one of the most powerful syntheses
of micro and macro social concerns.
Structuration theory attempts to transcend the traditional
division between action and structure by focusing on “social
practices” which are seen as producing and produced by structures.
For Giddens, structures are the rules and resources produced and
reproduced by social actors in their practices, and do not exist as
something external to actors.
My Approach to Teaching
I hope that you will explore these
issues yourself both in the readings that I have offered to you, and
through the internet, and other scholarly resources. There are many
web pages especially devoted to research in social psychology. Let
us share with one another what we are finding!
I have chosen not to assign a textbook
for this class, although several good ones exist. In particular I
like Spencer Cahill’s Inside Social Life: Readings in
Sociological Social Psychology (2003, Fifth Edition, Oxford
University Press.) Often, textbook end up costing over $100, for
information that is available for free on the internet. My primary
concern in not ordering a textbook was saving you, the student,
money. I hope that positives outweigh the negatives on this issue.
“Wikipedia” is a particularly
high-quality research tool. If you have never heard of
“ethnomethodology”, for example, put the words “ethnomethodology”
and “wikipedia” in your search engine (www.google.com
seems to be the best, but I also like www.alltheweb.com)
and read the entry. I personally spend hours each week just
“googleing” subject matters, and I will assume that you will too.
Try to find a couple of additional
outside overviews of social psychology. I have provided you with the
one from Professor Kearl at www.trinity.edu/~mkearl/socpsy-1.html
but many other good ones are out there. Again, I hope you take the
initiative to search the web and share with us that which you are
finding.
Check out:
I assume that you are a self-motivated,
self-directed adult learner who is taking this class because you want
to learn about the subject matter. I assume that you intend to give
this class you best efforts and that you hope to get an outstanding
evaluation. I assume that you do not think the same ways as I do,
and that your interests may not be exactly the same.”
You will see the word “critical” a
lot in my presentations. I believe that the role of the social
psychologist is to be a critic of the social world, to constantly
probe and ask difficult questions, and not be content with simple
answers or the “received wisdom” of conventional society. Much
of what passes as common sense is ideological distortion and cultural
mythology. To these ends, I hope to use “critical
thinking”—philosophical tools which help us examine and evaluate
all ideas.
“Critical thinking is that mode of thinking—about any subject,
content or problem—in which the thinker improves the quality of his
or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures
inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them”
(Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical
Thinking 2002, p1)
You will see that my general
orientation to sociology seeks to combine insights from many diverse
strands of social science. In my approach to understanding everyday
life, I draw upon several microsociological traditions, including
symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, and the work of Erving
Goffman to understand the nature of social activity in concrete
instances of social life. I use the broad term “interactionist”
to describe these microsociological traditions.
To this interactionist label I have
added the modifier “critical” to show my interest in creating a
social psychology in dialogue with critical theory and critical
social theory. Critical social theories are centrally concerned with
how power operates, and processes of domination. This tradition also
focuses on issues of race, class, gender, sexuality and other sites
of oppression. In analyzing the production of social reality in
everyday life we cannot loose site of the context in which this
production occurs--advanced industrial societies in late modernity
marked by gross inequalities. Privilege and oppression are not
always readily visible nor acknowledged, and we need an approach that
underscores how are lives are shaped in powerful ways by modern
industrial capitalism.
Critical theory is most closely identified with the Frankfurt
Institute of Social Research, although its origins are found in
Western Marxism generally. The phrase is now employed to discuss
diverse forms of thinking usually in a dialogue with Marxism. Some
of the ideas which have been linked to Marxism include Freudian
psychoanalysis, systems theory, feminism, communication theory. Some
important critical theorists include Gyorgy Lukacs, Theodor Adorno,
Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, Walter Benjamin,
Antonio Gramsci, Jurgen Habermas.
Critical interactionism is one form of
critical social psychology. There are other social psychologists
working within other traditions who also attempt to infuse social
psychological research with critical themes, including, for example,
feminist developmental psychologists, such as Carol Gilligan, or
anti-racist standpoint theorists, such as Patricia Hill Collins.
Critical social psychology refers to diverse approaches which
take an “engaged, anti-discriminatory and anti-essentialist
standpoint, in order to understand and explain psychological
phenomena as inseparable from the social order…Critical social
psychologists challenge psychology’s individualistic focus, its
assumption of a rational, unitary, autonomous and (usually male)
subject and its appropriation of a natural science paradigm within
which human behavior is decontextualized” (Jary and Jary 2000,
p126).
I envision the educational process as potentially liberating and
emancipatory. In these regards I have been by influenced by Paolo
Friere and “critical pedagogy”. Critical
pedagogy is an approach to the educational
proces which attempts to help students and educators question and
challenge domination, and the practices and beliefs that dominate.
The goal is to develop critical consciousness by going beneath
surface meanings, dominant myths, received wisdom and cultural
ideologies to understand deep meanings, social contexts, and root
causes. Social psychology can help to free us of the chains
of modern life.
About Me
I was born in Springfield,
Massachusetts and received a Bachelor’s in Business Administration
(B.B.A.) from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. I spent a
fifth undergraduate year studying art history and theatre at the
University of Paris—Sorbonne, earning a Certificate in French
Language and Civilization. I attended graduate school at the
University of California, Santa Barbara, receiving my M.A. and Ph.D.
in Sociology. I have taught at the Berkeley, Santa Cruz, and Santa
Barbara campuses of the University of California, the Fielding
Graduate University (Educational Leadership and Change Doctoral
Program), and Ventura College.
My graduate work was in
ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, and symbolic
interactionism—all forms of “microsociology”. I have been
fortunate enough to work with many luminaries in these fields,
including Don Zimmerman, Harvey Molotch, Tamotsu Shibutani, Don
Cressey, Thomas Scheff and Anthony Giddens. I have done research on
911 calls, medical communication, psychiatric intake interviews and
classroom settings. I also employed critical discourse analysis to
study news stories, and have published research on gang murder
stories and AIDS obituaries in the Los Angeles Times. For six months,
I did participant observation of clerical workers in a large
aerospace firm.
To see a list of my publications, click
here:
I have spent many years as an
anti-oppression educator and have published extensively on racist
imagery in American popular culture.
My current work is a participant
observational study of the methamphetamine subculture in Ventura
California. I am completing a book, entitled Dancing With
Dionysus: A Sociological Memoir of Methamphetamine Use, which
examines the everyday world of the “tweaker scene”, including how
people enter and exit that social world, and the norms and values of
that subculture. I draw upon “critical interactionism” for this
study.
I am a visual artist, working with many
media including acrylic paint and Prismacolor Markers.
I work as a counselor and case manager
for New Beginning Counseling Center, aiding homeless and recently
homeless (especially dually diagnosed) people find housing, jobs and
acquire life skills.
I am completing my certification in
alcohol and drug counseling at SBCC.
Comments
Post a Comment