Interactionism vs. Symbolic Interactionism

Attribute	Interactionism	Symbolic Interactionism
Definition	Focuses on how individuals interact with each other and their environment	Focuses on how individuals create and interpret symbols to communicate with each other
Key Theorists	George Herbert Mead, Erving Goffman	George Herbert Mead, Herbert Blumer
Key Concepts	Self, socialization, role-taking	Symbols, meaning, social interaction
Methodology	Qualitative research methods, observation, interviews	Qualitative research methods, participant observation, interviews
Focus	Individual behavior and interactions	Symbolic meanings and interpretations in social interactions

Introduction

Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism are two important sociological perspectives that focus on the ways in which individuals interact with each other and with society. While both perspectives share some similarities, they also have distinct differences in terms of their key concepts and theoretical frameworks.

Key Concepts

Interactionism is a broad theoretical perspective that emphasizes the importance of social interaction in shaping individual behavior and identity. It suggests that individuals construct their sense of self through their interactions with others, and that these interactions are influenced by social norms and expectations. Symbolic Interactionism, on the other hand, is a specific branch of interactionism that focuses on the ways in which individuals use symbols and language to create and interpret meaning in their social interactions.

Role of Symbols

One of the key differences between Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism is the role of symbols in shaping social interactions. While Interactionism acknowledges the importance of symbols in communication and social interaction, Symbolic Interactionism places a greater emphasis on the ways in which individuals use symbols to create and interpret meaning in their interactions. According to Symbolic Interactionism, individuals engage in a process of symbolic interaction in which they assign meanings to symbols and use these meanings to interpret and respond to the actions of others.

Focus on Micro-Level Interactions

Both Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism focus on micro-level interactions between individuals, rather than on larger social structures or institutions. However, Symbolic Interactionism places a greater emphasis on the ways in which individuals create and interpret meaning in their everyday interactions. This focus on the micro-level allows Symbolic Interactionism to provide a detailed analysis of how individuals construct their sense of self and identity through their interactions with others.

Emphasis on Social Construction of Reality

Another key similarity between Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism is their emphasis on the social construction of reality. Both perspectives suggest that individuals construct their sense of reality through their interactions with others, and that this reality is shaped by social norms, values, and expectations. However, Symbolic Interactionism goes a step further by highlighting the ways in which individuals use symbols and language to create and interpret meaning in their interactions, thereby shaping their understanding of reality.

Application to Everyday Life

Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism both have important implications for understanding social interactions in everyday life. By focusing on the ways in which individuals construct their sense of self and identity through their interactions with others, these perspectives can help us better understand how social norms and expectations influence our behavior and relationships. Additionally, Symbolic Interactionism provides a valuable framework for analyzing the ways in which individuals use symbols and language to create and interpret meaning in their interactions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Interactionism and Symbolic Interactionism are two important sociological perspectives that focus on the ways in which individuals interact with each other and with society. While both perspectives share some similarities, such as their emphasis on the social construction of reality and their focus on micro-level interactions, they also have distinct differences in terms of their key concepts and theoretical frameworks. By understanding these differences, we can gain a deeper insight into the complexities of social interactions and the ways in which individuals create and interpret meaning in their everyday interactions.