Instead, it works across three scales - micro, mezzo and macro - to create change. Social work doesn’t just help individual people. Social Work and Public Safety Collaborative.Early sociologists described how the social order is maintained and reproduced using the concept of the “looking glass self” which they view as an entity that exists between the biological being and a social being. But, a similar conclusion about “mirroring capacity” is also reflected in over one hundred years of observational research in sociology. Mirror neurons were first described in the 1980s using the results of brain imaging studies. Empathy, sympathy, and other emotional responses involving “taking the role of the other” are inferred to be the consequence of these emotional capacities. The official abstract is below! Abstract Mirror neurons” describe complementary affective neural activity that occurs in the brains of two different primates because they are both doing or observing the same action. Judging from comments I had back from reviewers, lots of biologists disagree with this-too bad! It has been published, and is out there for all to read now. This is an article that I wrote to suggest to biologists that they should take sociology more seriously. It concludes with a discussion of future directions symbolic interactionists should take in continuing to develop the field. Specifically, this article surveys significant contributions to the symbolic interactionist literature in areas such as dramaturgy, cultural studies, postmodernism, gender/status/power, self and identity, collective behavior and social movements, and social context and the environment. The article then reviews and assesses the empirical research that has emerged from these trajectories over the past decades, beginning with the classical studies of the mid-twentieth century and culminating in research programs that have emerged in the contemporary era. A brief summary of each figure's general perspective on symbolic interactionism is given, followed by a discussion of the research methodology that defines and distinguishes each. It first provides an overview of three main trajectories in symbolic interactionist thought, focusing on the work of Herbert Blumer (the Chicago School), Manford Kuhn (the Iowa School), and Sheldon Stryker (the Indiana School). This article surveys past theory and research in the interactionist tradition. Symbolic interactionism is a theoretical perspective in sociology that addresses the manner in which society is created and maintained through face-to-face, repeated, meaningful interactions among individuals. I conclude by speculating about the future role of interactionism. I discuss six empirical arenas in which interactionists have made major research contributions: social coordination theory, the sociology of emotions, social constructionism, self and identity theory, macro-interactionism, and policy-relevant research. I then describe the role of symbolic interactionism in three major debates confronting the discipline: the micro/ macro debate, the structure/agency debate, and the social realist/interpretivist debate. I examine here four processes that led to these changes: fragmentation, expansion, incorporation, and adoption. Simultaneously their core as an intellectual community has been weakened by the diversity of interests of those who self-identify with the perspective. Once considered adherents of a marginal oppositional perspective, confronting the dominant positivist, quantitative approach of mainstream sociology, symbolic interactionists find now that many of their core concepts have been accepted. Symbolic interactionism has changed over the past two decades, both in the issues that practitioners examine and in its position within the discipline.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |