SOCI-224 Midterm: SOCI-224 : chapter 3 study questions
9 Mar 2020
School
Department
Course
Professor
Why are interpretive and critical theories especially useful to scholars who lean toward the
subjectivist end of the objective-subjective continuum?
More subjective views of deviance claim that we cannot know deviance when we see it and
instead must be told that a behaviour or characteristic is deviant. The associated theories do not
look at the violation of social expectations, but rather at the nature of the social expectations
themselves. The interest is not in the act, but in the perceptions of and reactions to the act as well
as in the role of power in influencing these perceptions and reactions. Deviance is seen as
constructed through the social typing process whereby people have descriptive labels attached to
them, are evaluated or judged on the basis of those labels, and then are treated in certain ways
because of prior descriptions and evaluations. When society, rather than deviant people, is held
under a microscope – when the interest is in understanding social processes rather than specific
people the positivist interest in explaining the acquisition of deviant behaviour becomes less
relevant.
What are the core assumptions of symbolic interactionist theory, and how do they help us
understand the deviance dance?
Symbolic interactionism (interactionism): is the foundation for the range of interpretive theories
used to study deviance.
From a symbolic interactionist perspective, social action emerges from meaning, and meaning is
“continuously created and recreated through interpreting processes during interactions with
others”. Society is not a structure but rather a process.
The foundation for our interactions with others is communication through symbols. Society is
made up of people in constant communication with each other, and this is the source of all
meaning and understanding. All communication is symbolic in nature. Nonverbal
communication, through avenues such as gestures and facial expressions, is symbolic as well.
Processes that contribute to the way we develop meaning:
Role taking: by vicariously placing ourselves in the roles of others, we try to see the world from
their respective points of view and determine our own attitudes and actions accordingly.
Through the role of looking-glass self: when determining how to look or act and how we feel
about ourselves, we imagine how we appear to other people and what they think of that
appearance. What we imagine other people think of us influences what we think about ourselves
and how we look or act.
These “others” may be significant others or a generalized other.
Significant others are those people who are important to us – whose perceptions and reactions
matter to us.
The generalized other refers to “other people’ more generally, almost as a generic person,
developed through our ability to integrate the views of multiple people simultaneously: “what
would people think if I dressed like that?!”
As applied to the concepts of deviance and normality, these processes contribute to our
understanding of the “rules” in society, our perceptions of and reactions to ourselves and others
on the basis of those rules, and whether we identify ourselves as followers of those rules or as
rule breakers.
It is also through these processes that individuals who share similar perceptions come together
and form groups based on those shared perceptions. These groups may then attempt to influence
the perceptions of deviance and normality held by others, and may even take the form of large-
scale social movements. And because meanings and understandings vary among people based on
their own interactions and communications, the “deviance dance” emerges – some individuals or
groups will try to socially type certain people as deviant, while other individuals or groups will
argue that those same people are normal.
However, what they have in common is the foundational assumption of the symbolic
interactionist perspective: we develop understanding and attribute meaning to the world around
us and to ourselves on the basis of interactions we have had with other people in our lives.
According to research done by Barton (2015), in what ways do the experiences of some
LGBTQ persons illustrate the centrality of symbolic communication in social life?
Research on how self-identified lesbians and gay men say they recognize similar others
illustrates the centrality of symbolic communication in social life. Participants used the
term “gaydar” to describe this process of recognition. When asked what activated their
gaydar, they pointed to a range of physical, conversational, and interactional cues. Physical
cues include aspects of physical appearance, such as hair, clothing, grooming, posture, and
walk. Physical cues can also involve individuals’ personal environments, such as an absence
of family photos on their desk at work. Conversational cues consist of both the manner of
speaking (e.g., vocal inflection, tone of voice) and the content of conversations (e.g.,
avoiding the pronouns “he” or “she” when talking about their intimate partners, men who
do not make comments about attractive women). Most frequently, references to
interactional cues focused on eye contact – participants used terms such as “double look,”
“broken stare,” direct stare” and gaydar gaze. Participants emphasized the importance of
using symbolic cues to identify similar others, not only as a means of expanding their social
networks of individuals with shared identities and experiences, but also as a way to avoid
being deviantized by non-similar others.
What are the core assumptions of labelling theories? What are the different ways that
various labelling theorists have described the labelling process and its implications?
Labelling theories all address the very same process but use slightly different language. The
process they analyze is that of being labelled deviant and the consequences of that label. When
individuals are given a deviant label, people start to treat them differently, in a way that
corresponds to that label. Over time, being treated differently has an impact on how those
labelled individuals perceive themselves. Finally, as their identities change, their subsequent
behaviours and life choices are affected as well.
Document Summary
More subjective views of deviance claim that we cannot know deviance when we see it and instead must be told that a behaviour or characteristic is deviant. The associated theories do not look at the violation of social expectations, but rather at the nature of the social expectations themselves. The interest is not in the act, but in the perceptions of and reactions to the act as well as in the role of power in influencing these perceptions and reactions. When society, rather than deviant people, is held under a microscope when the interest is in understanding social processes rather than specific people the positivist interest in explaining the acquisition of deviant behaviour becomes less relevant. Symbolic interactionism (interactionism): is the foundation for the range of interpretive theories used to study deviance. From a symbolic interactionist perspective, social action emerges from meaning, and meaning is. Continuously created and recreated through interpreting processes during interactions with others .
