Provide a brief overview of both SI and SSP. Include what each approach emphasizes, their unit of analysis, and their primary method of data collection. TIP: Imagine you are explaining these concepts to a friend who has no background in sociological social psychology. The Crawford and Novak (2014) reading “What is Sociological Social Psychology” will be very useful in completing this assignment. What are the basic ideas? Remember: This is an academic exercise and you must get the concepts and themes correct to receive full credit. This is not a reflection blog!
Blog Assignment 4: Compare and Contrast Symbolic Interactionism and Social Structure and Personality.
by
Tags:
Comments
64 responses to “Blog Assignment 4: Compare and Contrast Symbolic Interactionism and Social Structure and Personality.”
-
Crawford and Novak (2014) center SI and SSP around the sociological perspective (a way of viewing the world that places people’s experiences within their social and historical context). Both orientations work outwards from broader societal patterns which encompass social facts, social norms, social stratification, SES, race, gender, and agency. SI is an approach to sociological social psychology that studies how social interaction is used to construct meaning. Those who embrace SI emphasize agency rather than constraint and argue that individuals are free to create there own meaning through the uniqueness of social experiences. SI is used to examine phenomena at the microlevel and its primary method of data collection is a style of observation very similar to ethnography. In contrast, SSP is an approach to sociological social psychology that is used to analyze macro societal patterns. Researchers that implement SSP emphasize the effects of structural positions on individuals’ thoughts, behavior, perception, beliefs, and emotions. The unit of analysis in SSP is macro and is typically measured using SES, gender, and race and ethnicity. SSP research is quantitative in nature and is gathered through survey data. Both orientations underscore a different aspect between the relationship of self/individual in society. While SI is focused on the individual freely creating and modifying meaning through social interaction, SSP leans more toward constraint and focuses on how societal level statuses shape the individuals’ perceptions, feelings, and behaviors. This also includes the perception of self. Go back to blog post 1 and 2 and evaluate the comments/blogs using these two lenses. What can be said regarding how our class views the relationship between the individual and society? Are we describing an individual who is freely constructing meaning through social interaction or are we describing an individual deeply connected to structural positions? Many of us described ourselves using status positions, age, gender, race, and SES. What does this mean?
LikeLike
-
Symbolic Interactionism assumes people respond to elements of their environment and they attach to these elements and their meanings created through social interaction. This perspective sees society as a product of shared symbols, the central concept of Symbolic Interactionism is the “self” which allows us to understand the effects of our actions. In other words, this theory basically focuses on how individuals interact. This theory argues that people’s actions are based on the meanings they assign to things, which can differ based on the person and can change over time. We see this in everyday life. A simple example would be the universal meaning of the thumbs up being “good” and the thumbs down meaning “bad” or the fact that we as a society have assumed the difference between gendered bathrooms as female or male depending on whether or not the stick figure is wearing a dress. Some of the primary methods of data collection for this theory consists of interviews, surveys, content analysis and experiments.
The Social Structure and Personality theory focuses on the connection between larger societal conditions and the individual, more specifically the influence of social structure on individuals. This theory emphasizes how social structure affects individuals. It is important to understand what we mean by social structure, including social status, roles, social networks, class, and stratification. These variations in social structures come into play with personality and can affect social structure. Similar to the theory before, the primary data collection are quantitative methods including survey data, interviews, and panels.LikeLike
-
This is a great overview. I just want to make it clear that SI primary method of data collection is observational. For example, ethnography which is more qualitative. In contrast, SSP is quantitative and centered around survey data. Thus, the methodologies are a bit different. You mentioned that SI implements survey data into their methodologies. While, I am sure we can find some study that does this, is this what is emphasized in the reading? Did I miss this somewhere?
LikeLike
-
Hi jmc02,
You have a great response and I really enjoyed the example you gave about how we all collectively just have an understanding that a thumbs up is relatively “good” in comparison to how the opposite is often considered “bad”. This example drives home how much we collectively ingrain certain concepts in our society and run with them without ever explaining why or questioning them, it’s just one of those things where it’s “common sense” or “collectively understood” and everyone kind of just knows it. This just further goes to show how fascinating it is to analyze the way we function on a sociological level as individuals but also within society and our communities.
LikeLike
-
Your overview of the two theories was nicely done. One thing that I would take a closer look at is how symbolic interactionism uses surveys and experiments for data collection. Since symbolic interactionism focuses more on face-to-face interactions, the data in most cases would be coming from ethnography. Survey and experiments are more numbers based which would mean it is quantitative. Other than that, you provided the main ideas of what the theory is!
LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic interactionism is a theory that argues that people’s actions are based on the meanings they assign to things which is different depending on each person and can change over time. For instance, the national flag means more to some people than others and is different for every person. This theory depends on the meaning that a person gives to something based on our norms and environment, and it also focuses on the role that people play in creating their own reality and helps us understand how interactions can shape other people’s experiences and behavior.
Furthermore, the social structure and personality theory focuses on the connections between larger societal conditions, macro, and the individual’s feelings, attitudes, behaviors. Some examples of this can be seen through family, law, religion, class, and economy. It’s important because it helps provide a framework in which people interact on an interpersonal level based on traits, interests, and other aspects of who they are individually.LikeLike
-
Hi, I really enjoyed reading your post. I think it was really insightful. I like the example that you gave for symbolic interactionism, the flag is a great example and really goes on to show how it has a deeper meaning and can be viewed as a symbol in many different ways. Social Structure and personality theory does, like you said, provide this framework and also goes on to explain how it kind of furthered society as a social construct.
LikeLike
-
Hi, I also really like the example you used to explain symbolic interactionism. I think the flag was such a great example because it’s an observation where not everyone can like it but others can. An example we can use to describe social structure would be seeing the races and ethnicities who like the flag because of who they are and the power they hold. I think you are definitely on the right track!
LikeLike
-
This post is only 159 words and does not engage with the themes of the writing prompt. Please reach out to me.
LikeLike
-
-
When looking at symbolic interactionism, the approach that this emphasized was the theoretical idea of how humans interact with society forgetting other aspects of what can be happening. Their unit of analysis would be people vs. society. Their primary method of data collection would be observation, interviews and as stated in the text “method to the ethnographic studies”. As for social structure and personality, the approach used is the level statues, such as race, gender, social class. It also doesn’t include other factors, it’s more so of individual feelings. Their unit of analysis is the statistics of what race is less while the other is at a disadvantage. Their primary method of data collection is statistics because it calculates what race, gender and social class has to give when doing something. We can clearly see the difference between these two studies which would be that one is very focused on multiple social factors, while the other one is focused on individuality but also the way some races are at disadvantage. The way how these are similar is by showing how much a person’s interaction and social class can matter in terms of the differences and similarities they can have. It all varies. Overall, there’s people mainly focused on the idea of interaction without any social structure being built into it while the other one is seen on behaviors and how these behaviors come from their race and can distinguish who gets more or less.These are just very basic ideas that we get to study which is pretty amazing.
LikeLike
-
This is a very interesting overview. Great work. I have a few comments.
The unit of analysis for SI is at the micro level and revolves around the individual or face-to-face social interaction. I don’t understand what you mean by people vs. society. Can you expand what you mean? Further, your outline of SSP is a bit foggy and I don’t fully understand. The way you describe the unit of analysis is a bit confusing to me. Can you clarify what the unit of analysis is for SSP?
Here is how I understand it:
SSP is an approach to sociological social psychology that is used to analyze macro societal patterns. Researchers that implement SSP emphasize the effects of structural positions on individuals’ thoughts, behavior, perception, beliefs, and emotions. The unit of analysis in SSP is macro and is typically measured using SES, gender, and race and ethnicity. SSP research is quantitative in nature and is gathered through survey data. Both orientations underscore a different aspect between the relationship of self/individual in society.
LikeLike
-
-
According to Crawford and Novak (2014), both SI and SSP cores center around the bigger topic of the sociological perspective, which is how we view the world and our experiences living in it concerning our social and historical context. Social Interactionism (SI) is examined through face-to-face interactions in natural contexts that focus on the meanings people create via their social interactions. Observing how people construct their realities, perceptions, beliefs, and plans of action through their interactions with others is why SI emphasizes agency over restriction. The methodology of SI research frequently resembles that of the ethnographic investigations that anthropologists have historically made into other cultures, which is pretty interesting. SI analyses are in-depth and provide a sense of what it’s like to belong to a specific group. In basic terms, social interactionism focuses on how individuals interact with each other within societal settings and overall life. Their method of data collection is primarily observational as it’s often studied on a more micro level than SSP. SSP on the other hand focuses less on individual interpretation/meaning and instead focuses more on the analysis of macro societal status and trends that shape individuals’ sense of self, including their perception, emotions, thoughts, behaviors, and so on. SSP researchers analyze the effects of structural positions like social class, gender, race, and ethnicity. They also investigate how these statuses impact people’s ideas, hopes, feelings, and social interaction patterns. Their research is quantitative and almost always includes the evaluation of survey data, which can be extremely helpful. Overall, both revolve around the bigger picture of sociological perspective, but SSP investigations involve a considerable number of crunching in contrast to the research that’s conducted by SI researchers.
LikeLike
-
Wonderful analysis. Really well done. Did you have a chance to go back to blog post 1 and 2 and evaluate the comments/blogs using these two lenses. What can be said regarding how our class views the relationship between the individual and society? I mentioned this in my own blog post. What do you think?
LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic Interactionism emphasizes the relationship of the individual to society. It argues that individuals respond to the meanings that they construct as they interact with each other. The Symbolic Interactionism approach puts an emphasis on the self as an agent that does not exist separately from social life, instead it “…serves as the reflective beacon of social interaction…” (Holstein and Gubrium, 22). Symbolic interactionism views human beings as active agents that are influenced from our social organization (or society). Symbolic Interactionism has a micro level unit of analysis, focusing on face-to-face interactions in natural settings. The primary method of data collection for Symbolic Interactionism is more qualitative, focusing on observation similar to ethnographic research.
The Social Structure and Personality approach emphasizes the effects that structural positions have on an individual’s pattern of behavior and interaction. Examples of structural positions include class, gender, and race/ethnicity. Because Social Structure and Personality looks at more generalized effects of structural positions, it utilizes a more macro level unit of analysis. The primary method of data collection for SSP is quantitative and utilizes survey data. Compared to Symbolic Interactionism, Social Structure and Personality research emphasizes more generalizable data. Generalizable data is data that can be applied to all individuals in society. On the other hand, Symbolic Interactionism research aims to obtain more detailed data on a specific subset of individuals and their experiences. While Symbolic Interactionism views how individuals construct their meanings through their interactions with others, Social Structure and Personality takes a more broad approach that views how individuals are affected by larger societal structures.-
I think your analysis was very spot on, you explained everything so well! I really agree with how you concluded both orientations at the end of your blog post. SI is more on the individual level while SSP takes a broader approach especially with the type of research and data they collect.
LikeLike
-
Hello dustar23!
I enjoyed how you included text in your explanation in order to provide examples of reasoning! It helped me understand a little more on the topic as well! I also liked how to contrasted the difference between the two and explained in depth how they are different terms.LikeLike
-
Well done!
LikeLike
-
Hi dustar23, I really enjoyed your overview on Symbolic Interactionism and Social Structure and Personality. Your explanation was clear and easy to follow and understand. I especially like your use of the quote from Holstein and Gubrium which helps with the understanding of the Symbolic Interactionism approach. I also like how your blog compared SI and SSP all the way through. Good Job!
LikeLike
-
-
Crawford and Novak (2014) stated that each face of sociological social psychology reveals different aspects of the relationship between individuals and our society. This encompasses everything from our individual(self) and how our behavior and actions are influenced by the society that surrounds us. The orientation of Symbolic interactionism allows us to understand the relationship between society and the individual, and how our social interactions draw different meanings and affect our behavior. SI is more often associated with agency because they observe people in a larger social setting letting individuals create their own realities and their own meanings from their interactions. It is also a micro unit of analysis because they are focusing on individuals and how their social interactions affect emotions and behaviors. SI methods of research are highly associated with ethnographic studies, and it is highly qualitative. On the contrary, the orientation of Social Structure and Personality emphasizes the macro level aspects of society and how they impact individuals. Such as, social class, gender, race, and ethnicity. They closely study and observe how these statuses affects a person’s emotions, goals, and behavior towards others and to society. They analyze utilizing quantitative research because they use survey data and numbers to draw conclusions about their studies. Both SI and SSP are orientations that have very distinct forms of gathering data but in the end, they do collide with one another. All the observations and conclusions come down to the large idea that individuals and our “self” are highly influenced and affected by concepts in our society.
LikeLike
-
Great job on your analysis. Your last two sentences of comparing but also contrasting symbolic interactionism and social structure & personality were spot on. As you said, they are on two different sides of the spectrum but still find a way to collide based on the main idea that individuals are affected by society. Although one is looking at it through a smaller lens while the other is through a wide lens, the focus is that societal factors play a huge role in our daily life.
LikeLike
-
Great summary of both Symbolic Interactionism (SI) and Social Structure and Personality (SSP)! I appreciate your clear explanation of how each approach emphasizes different aspects of the relationship between individuals and society. Your point about SI being associated with agency and individual realities is spot on, as is your point about SSP focusing on macro-level aspects of society such as social class and race. It’s also important to note that while SI tends to rely more on qualitative research methods like ethnography, SSP can also incorporate qualitative methods in addition to quantitative ones. For example, SSP researchers might use qualitative interviews to gather more in-depth information about how social structures impact individuals’ emotions and behaviors, while also using quantitative surveys to collect numerical data on attitudes and behaviors. Overall, I agree with your conclusion that both SI and SSP converge on the idea that individuals are deeply influenced by their social context. I believe this is a crucial insight for understanding the complexities of human behavior and social interaction.
LikeLike
-
This is a wonderful response and great example of engagement with your colleagues. Please email me a note that outlines that I have given you one point of extra credit for community building and class participation. again, great job!
LikeLike
-
-
Hey Sky,
I really enjoyed reading your analysis. I loved how far you broke everything down as it really made for an easy read. Your conclusion brought everything together, and illustrated how while these approaches are very different in nature they do intersect and work towards the same goal. One cannot paint the full picture without the other. Great post!LikeLike
-
Your summary about both theories is super thorough and great. I liked your point about agency and symbolic interactionism because people are in control of their own environments followed by their reactions and meanings to them. Similarly to you,I mentioned how the data collection sample is usually smaller than social structure and personality because we’re not dealing with huge societal effects at a huge scale. Nice work!
LikeLike
-
-
In the reading “What is Sociological Social Psychology?”, Crawford and Novak detail that Symbolic interactionism and social structure and personality focus on the bigger topic of sociological perspectives.
Symbolic interactionism, also known as SI, focuses on how people construct meanings based on interactions they have with society. It emphasizes viewing the individuals rather than the whole society to see how their perceptions and beliefs are shaped based on the interactions they have with others. Since it is highly detailed on individual interactions, it would be considered a micro-level analysis of society. In other words, it is viewed through a smaller lens because of the focus in on an individual’s meaning rather than society’s meaning. The unit for symbolic interactionism is qualitative, which means that it is based on observation and analysis. Examples of how symbolic interactionism can be observed are through focus groups, in-depth interviews, and ethnography.
On the other hand, social structure and personality, also known as SSP, focuses on societal patterns and how structure positions affect an individual’s thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and patterns of social interaction. Structure positions may include one’s social class, gender, race, and ethnicity. Since this is looking at the overall big picture of society, it would be considered a macro-level analysis. The unit for social structure and personality is quantitative, which means its focus is on data and numbers. Social structure and personality can be observed through survey data and experiments.
LikeLike
-
Great job! Did you have a chance to go back and review your peers responses to blog post 1 and 2? How do your peers view the relationship between self and society? Is it more SI or SSP? What are your thoughts?
LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic Interactionism (SI) and Social Structure and Personality (SSP) are two theoretical perspectives in sociological social psychology that offer distinct views on the relationship between the individual and society. Symbolic Interactionism emphasizes the importance of symbols and language in shaping human behavior and society. It focuses on the ways in which individuals interact with one another through symbols, which can include verbal and nonverbal communication, gestures, and shared meanings. SI emphasizes the importance of understanding how individuals interpret and assign meaning to symbols, and how these meanings are shaped by social context and shared cultural values. The unit of analysis in SI is the individual and their interactions with others. The primary method of data collection in SI is ethnography and participant observation, which involves observing individuals in their natural settings and examining the meaning they assign to symbols.
Social Structure and Personality, on the other hand, emphasize the importance of social structure in shaping human behavior and personality. SSP views individuals as shaped by their social environment and the roles they occupy within that environment. It suggests that individuals develop patterns of behavior and personality traits that are consistent with the social roles they occupy, and that these roles are determined by larger social structures and institutions. The unit of analysis in SSP is the social structure and the ways in which it influences individual behavior. The primary method of data collection in SSP is survey research, which involves collecting data from a large sample of individuals using standardized questionnaires.
While both SI and SSP offer valuable insights into the relationship between individuals and society, they differ in their emphasis on the role of symbols and social structure in shaping behavior. SI focuses on the importance of shared meanings and the ways in which they are constructed and interpreted through interaction, while SSP emphasizes the importance of social roles and the ways in which they are determined by larger social structures and institutions. Ultimately, both perspectives offer valuable insights into the complex relationship between individuals and society and provide important tools for understanding human behavior and social change.
LikeLike
-
Great overview!
LikeLike
-
Fantastic overview! Go back to blog post 1 and 2 and evaluate the comments/blogs using these two lenses. What can be said regarding how our class views the relationship between the individual and society? Are we describing an individual who is freely constructing meaning through social interaction or are we describing an individual deeply connected to structural positions? Many of us described ourselves using status positions, age, gender, race, and SES. What does this mean?
LikeLike
-
Hello! You did an excellent job highlighting the differences and connections between the theoretical perspectives of Symbolic Interactionism (SI) and Social Structure and Personality (SSP). You made a good point in explaining that Symbolic Interactionism emphasizes the importance of symbols and language in shaping human behavior and society through the use of verbal and nonverbal communication, gestures, and shared meanings. In a sense, both methodologies are needed in order to assist in defining society through meaning. They are both highly influential in regard to their connections to society through varying perspectives. As I have recently stated in my own post, SI essentially highlights the significance of an individual and how they are impacted through societal standards and expectations, while SSP emphasizes how society strives to develop us as a whole. Great points made!
LikeLike
-
-
test
LikeLike
-
Symbolic Interactionism (SI) and Social Structure and Personality (SSP) are faces of sociological social psychology. Both approaches work towards finding patterns in society contributing to different issues surrounding social facts and norms such as social stratification, social class, socioeconomic status, race, ethnic groups, gender, sex, constraint, and agency.
SI employs mainly qualitative, observational research in natural, face-to-face settings similar to ethnography. Fans of SI are big on agency, or the ability to act independently on free-will to make decisions. Proponents of SI are most likely also proponents of Jean-Paul Sartre’s theory of Self-Determination, which states that regardless of outside pressures, people are able to make their own decisions and exercise freedom. SI is used to draw meaning from social interactions among individuals, meaning the data collected is at the micro-level.
SSP is a different approach to understanding patterns in society. SSP works at the macro level by analyzing quantitative data drawn mostly by survey. SSP focuses more on status like race, gender, social class, etc. SSP is interested in the effects of status on patterns in people’s thoughts, beliefs, aspirations, emotions, and interactions. While SI is interested in agency, SSP focuses more on the realm of constraint in researching how societal labels affect behaviors in populations.
After reviewing blog posts 1 and 2, I would say that our class gave mostly free-form answers. There were some common themes in mentioned status such as age and gender, but a lot of the responses revolved around things such as hobbies, sports, and personal qualities that are independent of status. I would argue that we as a class are not as status dependent in our perception of ourselves as I would think we would be. Please let me know your thoughts.LikeLike
-
This is great analysis. You mentioned that hobbies, sports, and personal qualities are independent of status. I find this really interesting and I would love to hear more. In my view, status and these phenomena are inextricably linked. For example, sports and hobbies are uniquely tied to SES and affluence. Weber and Bourdieu argue that even our tastes, likes, and dislikes (personal qualities) are significantly related to SES and prestige.
LikeLike
-
Hi AC! This was a very well-thought-out analysis, it was very clear and easy to read! I’m very interested in everyone’s thoughts on social structure and personality because I think it is so important to recognize how social constructs like gender and class have such big effects on our personalities and views of ourselves. I definitely think that things like gender hinder people’s initial views of themselves, as it is hard to break those social boundaries and be comfortable in versions of ourselves that push those social constraints. I also somewhat agree with Prof Figueroa on the hobby aspect, I never really thought about it, but I do think that privilege and SES have a lot to do with what activities we got to participate in growing up. I do think there is a difference between those hobbies and interests, though. We all have interests, but what goes further to deepen those interests is investing time and money in activities, like sports or art.
LikeLike
-
-
Both Mr. Novak and Mr. Crawford have made it appoint on their beliefs when
touching on the sociological perspective. They believe that Social Interactionism (SI) and The Social Structure and Personality (SSP) form how we see our universe and how we decide to live our individual lives in a larger perspective of society. For example, SSP leans towards the idea of social constructs. This could be in relation to subjects such as poverty, the way we feel, how we think, how we were raised, etc. SI on the other hand correlates to interactions that take place in our everyday lives. For example, the religion you follow, subjects you feel strongly about, and if you are an individual who needs a plan in a school/ work environment or if you simply take it one step at a time. To conclude, SI is a thorough analysis of interactionism and the way we mingle or entertain those around us. However, just because SI and SSP are different, I believe they can help shape one another. For example, your social class could shape the way you socialize with others. It is a common stereotype that the upper class looks down on the lower class and refuses to have any type of interaction because of how “different” they are as human beings. Or believing that janitors are different beings than lawyers. It is all about perspective. It is truly unique to be asked to explain these concepts because one does not really think about it unless it is asked or studied. Both SI and SSP are involved with research conducted by investigators who are attempting to pinpoint who we are as individuals and who or what we identify with.LikeLike
-
Hello krmoy, great overview on the topic for this week! I believe you offered a great explanation on symbolic interactionism and social structure and personality. I especially liked your analysis that symbolic interactionism and social structure and personality can shape one another. While SI says that we are active agents that are influenced by society, it can also be true that the structural positions in society shape and influence how we interact with the world. Great post!
LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic interactionism is a lens of viewing the relationship between self and society, and it focuses on how people interpret life through their own interactions, making the self an integral part of social life rather than a separate part. It is a way of analyzing society in a “micro” way since it focuses on individuals and their own separate meanings and sets of interactions. One important thing mentioned in the textbook about symbolic interactionism is that individuals have agency in their “social worlds” and are influenced by the culture and interactions around them, but they are also a big part of the culture and society that they are being influenced by. This means that individuals have agency over what groups they are part of that they allow themselves to be influenced by. The method of data collection for symbolic interactionism is qualitative, in talking about SI, Blumer describes that “to know and document the shape and content of the self, one must observe the self in action.” He argues that SI cannot be analyzed merely by statistics or numbers, it must be seen in real-time.
Social structure and personality see things in a broader sense and argues that the self is influenced by constraints and social systems like class, race, and gender. The research method for this lens is quantitative, with data found in surveys. SI argues that individuals have agency over how their self is molded, but SSP argues that social constraints have an effect on how personality is developed.
After going back to blog post 1, I noticed that not many people mentioned race, class, or gender, most people talked about their personalities, families, jobs, and interests. I think as a class most of us had analyzed ourselves internally rather than externally in a view that incorporated societal constraints. However, I also think that things like SES, gender, and race are more personal things to individuals and many are not comfortable talking about them and how those aspects have shaped them.LikeLike
-
Great job! Remember: SI and SSP are centered around the sociological perspective (a way of viewing the world that places people’s experiences within their social and historical context). Both orientations work outwards from broader societal patterns which encompass social facts, social norms, social stratification, SES, race, gender, and agency. SI is an approach to sociological social psychology that studies how social interaction is used to construct meaning. Those who embrace SI emphasize agency rather than constraint and argue that individuals are free to create there own meaning through the uniqueness of social experiences. SI is used to examine phenomena at the microlevel and its primary method of data collection is a style of observation very similar to ethnography
LikeLike
-
Hello, I really like the way that you defined these two concepts. Starting with SI you mentioned how it argues that individuals have agency over themselves, while SSP argues that social constraint has an effect on how we develop. You put it in a very simple yet effective way.
LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic interactionism describes how individuals interact with one another and argues that people’s actions are based on the meanings they assign to things, which can differ from person to person depending on the individual and are subject to change over time. Furthermore, It emphasizes that society is created and maintained through face-to-face, repeated interactions in order to construct their own meaning of society. An example of SI would be that in this country an image of a bald eagle represents freedom or just simply America itself. Obviously, this connotation would probably be different if you were to show this image to someone in another country, but that emphasizes that their interactions are different causing them to assign different meanings to things. The primary method of data collection for SI is done by observation in a social environment and in doing this takes a bit more in-depth look at individuals and their unique experiences. The social structure and personality theory is kind of what it sounds like, allowing us to examine the influence social structure has on an individual. When we talk about one’s Social structure we mean a person’s social class, social status, the roles he or she plays, the culture, groups, and social institutions they are involved in. These categories of social structure that they uniquely belong to establish his or her perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors in life. The primary method of data collection for this theory can be recorded through mostly survey evaluation. This data is usually collected at a much larger level and is more generalized than that of SI.
LikeLike
-
Great overview! Remember: Those who embrace SI emphasize agency rather than constraint and argue that individuals are free to create there own meaning through the uniqueness of social experiences. SI is used to examine phenomena at the microlevel and its primary method of data collection is a style of observation very similar to ethnography
LikeLike
-
Hi Jars,
I think you did a great job with explaining both theories. I also liked how you incorporated an example of how the bald eagle represents the United States because we gave it that meaning, but how other countries may not understand that. Really supports how meanings depend on your society. Nice job!LikeLike
-
-
Crawford and Novak (2014) emphasize Symbolic interactionism (SI) and Social Structure and Personality (SSP) through the sociological lens. For some background in the manner, social psychology is depicted as a field that focuses on the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors in relation to oneself and others within the social context. This concept helps us understand the nature and causes that occur through social behavior. Based on categorical social facts as they become beneficial in efficiently targeting collective environments. Social norms are representative of how one should behave in varying situations and circumstances in society. These societal expectations can be based on how one should dress or act. Social stratification plays a large role in formulating the ways in which people live. Meaning, this is a form of rank in terms of one’s social class, socioeconomic status (SES), race, ethnic group, gender, and sex, etc.
Symbolic Interactionism (SI) emphasizes the personal meanings that people inflict on objects, events, and behaviors. This assumes that people respond to the aspects of their environment based on the subjective meanings in which they have attached to those elements. Through research, it was portrayed that through this perspective, reality is understood to be socially constructed based on the meanings developed within the context of one’s “face-to-face interactions”. This may occur in college settings where students are in contact with varying social contributors such as peers, teachers, campus staff, and others etc. The primary method of data collection for SI is Ethnography. This is a phenomenon which occurs at the micro-level in unit analysis. This is a form of observational data taken in a qualitative manner.
In contrast, Social Structure and Personality (SSP) is an approach that targets the macro level unit of analysis of societal consistencies and patterns. This is a classification of sociological social psychology which typically emphasizes more on one’s social class, socioeconomic status (SES), race, ethnicity, and gender etc. It emphasizes the relations of status characteristics in regard to perception, emotion, and behavior. Differing from Symbolic Interactionism, SSP’s primary method of data collection is quantitative typically in the form of surveys/questionnaires. This methodology examines the differing results between groups rather than what occurs within them.
Both methodologies are influential in regard to their connections to society through varying perspectives. One essentially highlights the significance of an individual and how they are impacted through societal standards, while the other emphasizes how society strives to develop us as a whole.
LikeLike
-
Great job! You are right, both orientations work outwards from broader societal patterns which encompass social facts, social norms, social stratification, SES, race, gender. Yet, don’t forget the emphasis on agency!
LikeLike
-
Hey, I really enjoyed reading your overview of what SI and SSP are. It looks like we both put the same thing when it comes to our analysis on what SI and SSP are. I liked the way you explained what social norms are and how you tied that into society’s expectations of us.
LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic interaction is centered around how people interact with people and things around them. This interaction depends on the different meanings that individuals assign to things. These meanings vary by person and time as our meanings can change over time. Symbolic interaction is more on a personal and internal level as people act according to what meanings they give to each person, object, place, etc. SI further proves that our society is mainly socially constructed because we are the ones that give meanings to things. For example, Americans give meanings to gender stereotypes such as it is common to assume that girls wear skirts, but boys do not. Whereas in other countries there are men that wear skirts, so the meanings and expectations Americans set out for the United States does not apply everywhere. This further demonstrates that meanings vary by person. This also goes to show the importance that society has on the self. People interact and adapt their meanings according to what they learn from their interactions in society. SI can also be easily seen through real life observation. Social structure and personality tends to focus more on the external parts of an individual such as class, race, and gender. SSP argues that how we act and behave has a lot to do with these factors because it involves constraints and adaptation based on the social group/label we are in.Unlike SI, SSP research can be collected through surveys with quantitative data as it is more structured. Both SI and SSP provide information about the relationship between self and society and how both influence how we see and interact in the world. Going back to blog 1 and 2 I would say that most of us went the SSP way but I think both theories influence who we are and act. It is easier to describe yourself through what race, ethnicity, age you are than explaining who you are based on how you personally see the world. I think that is why most people refer to themselves by these structural positions.
LikeLike
-
Great outline. Remember Crawford and Novak (2014) center SI and SSP around the sociological perspective (a way of viewing the world that places people’s experiences within their social and historical context). Both orientations work outwards from broader societal patterns which encompass social facts, social norms, social stratification, SES, race, gender, and agency. While SI is focused on the individual freely creating and modifying meaning through social interaction, SSP leans more toward constraint and focuses on how societal level statuses shape the individuals’ perceptions, feelings, and behaviors.
LikeLike
-
Hi JS,
I agree with what you stated in your response. Symbolic interactions are useful for the understanding of SSP researchers when conducting research as the SSP researchers study how effects of different statuses. This is one of the main ways in which both go hand in hand.LikeLike
-
-
SI, short for symbolic interactionism is where sociological social psychologists study face-to-face interactions in natural settings and focus on the meanings constructed among individuals through their social interactions. Symbolic interactionists study how people create their realities along with their perceptions, beliefs, and plans of action through interactions with others. The SI research is also compared to the method of ethnographic studies which anthropologists used outside of the US. The research done by symbolic interactionists is said to be extremely detailed and gives readers an idea of what it feels like to be an individual pertaining to a specific group.
SSP, short for social structure and personality, accounts for the study of (macro) societal patterns than the SI perspective. While SI research tells us how it feels to be part of a particular group, SSP researches focus on studying the effects of states which include social class, gender, and race/ethnicity. The studies reflect how statuses have the ability to affect individuals’ thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and patterns of social interaction. The primary data collection method includes quantitative studies and involves the analysis of survey data. In comparison with research done by symbolic interactionists, SSP studies use more numbers and require more math. One example of research within SSP is the “literature on the consequences of adolescent employment”.
In a sense, SI and SSP go hand in hand as SSP research seems to work off of SI research, although SSP research takes a different approach when it comes to analyzing data.LikeLike
-
This was well done! Awesome!
LikeLike
-
Hello Aramoto, I really enjoyed reading your summary of the article. I feel like you did a great job explaining everything in such a way that it makes it easy for anyone to understand. I also like the amount of detail you provided in your summary as it explains each approach and topic in a clear way. I personally don’t belive that these two topics go hand in hand but I do like your point of view and reasoning for your beliefs.
LikeLike
-
-
When it comes to symbolic interactionism, also known as SI, we can see a connection between both a person’s interactions and society. What I mean by this is that rather than looking at society as a whole and seeing one big picture, we should look at the individuals within the society and get their personal beliefs. The reason why we should look at the individuals rather than society is because society influences people and their beliefs which can interrupt the person’s actual thoughts and beliefs. Symbolic interactionism’s primary method for data collection is more qualitative. This means that the data collection focuses on observations, similar to ethnographic research. When it comes to The Social Structure and personality, also known as SSP, it focuses more towards the effects that structural positions have on an individual’s behavior and interaction. Social Structure and Personality focus on the effects of structural position, doing so it uses the macro level unit of analysis to capture the data. It uses this research to get information such as class, gender, race, and ethnicity for structural positions. The data gathered for Social Structure can be used not only to society as a whole but it can also be applied to individuals within the society. This allows the data that the research gathers to be more generalizable.
LikeLike
-
Your assessment of both SI and SSP could use more detail. Please know that both SI and SSP are centered around the sociological perspective (a way of viewing the world that places people’s experiences within their social and historical context). Both orientations work outwards from broader societal patterns which encompass social facts, social norms, social stratification, SES, race, gender, and agency. SI is an approach to sociological social psychology that studies how social interaction is used to construct meaning. Those who embrace SI emphasize agency rather than constraint and argue that individuals are free to create there own meaning through the uniqueness of social experiences.
LikeLike
-
Hello! I liked what you had to say about both SI and SSP, It was clear about what your understanding of both terms was. However, I do believe you can go into more detail about what the terms mean research/statistically speaking. Maybe even add an example to help explain what each term means.
LikeLike
-
Hello, I like that you put your own thoughts from the reading and explain it in your own way. Explaining how SI should be seen as us looking at the individual not society. As well as putting the idea of SSP very simply and with a comparison to the previous topic, SI.
LikeLike
-
-
According to Crawford and Novak (2014), Symbolic Interactionism (SI) is used when sociological social psychologists study face-to-face interactions by observing in a natural setting where there is mainly a lot of communication between individuals. SI documents how people create their sense of self through interacting with others. SI analyses are detailed and represent how people create their sense of self in a particular setting. Also, lets us see what particular group they belong to. Social Structure and Personality (SSP) is much more different than SI because SSP focuses on a person’s social class, gender, and race/ethnicity. SSP studies how an individual’s thoughts, emotions, and beliefs can be influenced by the status of society. SI is also more observational research and SSP is more data using numbers. For example, when a person would like to collect data about the experience of working a full-time job and being in school you would use the SI method. If a person would like to do research based on the number of students who work a full-time job and are in school and separate them into categories such as age, race, and gender you would use the SSP method. SSP will give you your answer in numbers while SI will give you descriptions of the data that has been observed. Both SI and SSP take sociology to the next level using macro-levels, SI is seen to be more macro than psychology according to Figure 1.2 graph. SSP is also more macro than psychology and SI, SSP is toward the end of the Macro-Level graph.
LikeLike
-
Hi Honeybun,
I like how you stated that SI is focused on face-to-face forms of socialization that help shape each individual’s meanings to symbols and such. Your explanation on the differences among SI and SSP were very straightforward and easy to read and understand which is great. Your examples on what quantitative and qualitative data would look like were incredibly helpful, as I had not thought about actual examples before.LikeLike
-
Hi Honeybun your analysis was very straightforward and easy to comprehend l liked that you specified that the data from SI was observational vs the data for the SSP which was numerical data. I also really liked your school example. That was a very clean and easy way to show the exact difference between the two
LikeLike
-
-
The “What is Sociological Social Psychology” reading in The Crawford and Novak (2014) gives a thorough explanation of the differences among SI (symbolic interactionism) and SSP (social structure and personality.) According to Crawford and Novak, SI collects data through observations which can also be considered qualitative data. A form of qualitative data is ethnography, which allows researchers to analyze society and social patterns at a microlevel. Symbolic interactionism is important to researchers because it allows individuals to construct and edit their meanings to symbols because of their own social interactions and experiences at an individual level. Symbolic interactionism allows individuals to have freedom in their interpretations, without pushing a right or wrong way of doing so. Symbolic interactionism is very open to differences in interpretations due to the different experiences and forms of socialization that everyone experiences.
SSP on the other hand collects data through surveys involving quantitative data, which is the complete opposite of SI. SSP looks for survey data involving gender, race and ethnicity and its effects on beliefs, feelings and behaviors. Because SSP focuses on quantitative data, it is used to analyze society and social patterns from a macro level. Since SSP analyzes at a macrolevel, it looks at how different societies and structure affect an individual’s perceptions and their meanings associated with symbols and interactions. SSP connects social constructs to the societies that the individuals are in, as opposed to SI that connects the social constructs to the individual’s personal interactions. SSP focuses on social structures and their effects on individuals, as it analyzes at a macro level and looks at the effects on the overall society as a whole.LikeLike
-
Starting with SI, which stands for Symbolic Interactionism, this would be measured by documenting how people create their perceptions, beliefs and overall their actions through the interactions and relationships with other people. The approach is similar to the ethnographic studies that are used in studying other cultures outside of the U.S. This is then observed inside a coffee shop in order to see not only how the workers interact with each other and the customers, but also how the people that were there were interacting with each other and where they gravitate the most. Now moving to SSP, also known as Social structure and personality. This focuses more toward the study of societal patterns. Their research looks at things such as social class, gender, and race. They look at how those factors affect an individual’s beliefs, aspirations, emotions, and more with their social interactions. The SSP looks into how structural positions affect and influence a person’s social interactions. This research requires more analysis through surveys unlike the SI research. This approach is more statistical with the use of graphs and numbers. For the research study they took a study on the percent of youth employed by gender and by race. This included their age, gender, and race/ethnicity being separated from white, african american, latino. This research was on the consequences of teenage employment, this went over how these specific categories may have affected them through employment and their future being employed. Overall these two social concepts were able to display different ways that may shape our abilities and beliefs especially how we react with them.
LikeLike
-
Hi Dori,
I enjoyed reading your response! I found your example that you used for symbolic interactionism to be interesting because everyone inside the coffee shop has gone through different environments which shape their perceptions, beliefs, and actions. In addition, I agree that race, social class, and gender are main focuses for SSP because they play a big role in today’s society and shape how we view the world and interact.LikeLike
-
-
Symbolic Interactionism is the view of social behavior that emphasizes gestural or linguistic communication and it’s subjective understanding. Sociological social psychologists study face to face interactions in natural settings and focus on the meanings constructed among individuals through their social interactions. A symbolic interactionists approach emphasizes agency over constraint using a micro-level unit of the analysis, individual. A unit of analysis means what the researcher is studying. In this case it is the individual, which studies how micro-level attributes such as personality characteristics like conscientiousness or openness affects someone’s behaviors or emotions. The primary method of data collection is documenting how people construct their realities which include their beliefs, perceptions and plans of actions, through their relationships with other people. Symbolic Interactionism analyses are extremely detailed and shows people what it is like to ne a member of a particular group.
Social Structure Personality focuses on the relationship between macro-social systems as well as individual attitudes, feelings and behaviors. Social Structure Personality researchers use a macro-level analyses which focus on aspects of society that exist beyond and above the individual, at either an aggregate or collective level. In macro-level studies the unit of analysis include the group, the country, the state, the city, the county or the world. A Social Structure Personality approach emphasizes on the effect of statuses meaning structural positions, like race/ethnicity, gender and social class. Social Structure Personality researchers study how statuses such as the ones previously stated affect an someone’s individual thoughts, emotions, aspirations, beliefs, and patterns of social interactions. Their primary method of data almost always involves the analysis of survey data which requires some number crunching.LikeLike
-
SI is the acronym for Social Interactionism which is a way sociology looks at human interaction and how important it is, it also looks into how symbols and meanings shape our social reality. SI solely looks at how humans construct their world and how they see the world to be through their interactions with other people instead of just looking at how they interact with societal structures. SI is the individual unit of analysis, and the way data is collected when it comes to research in SI is though qualitative research. This is through things like interviews and observing participants. SI researchers are looking to see how humans interpret meanings and symbols through social interactions. Researchers are trying to see how these things may cause individuals to behave a certain way and to see how they see reality. SSP is the acronym for Social Structure and Personality. SSP is the perspective that sociology uses to see the interactions between individuals and their different personalities development and societal structures. SSP believes that the way our personalities develop is based on things like our class, gender, race, etc.… Based on our behavior we see how those changes or how it affects common social structures. The unit SSP uses to analyze is social structure and the individual. The main way SSP gets its data comes from quantitative research through things like statistical analysis and surveys. SSP researchers goal is to see how societal structures can challenge individuals personality development and the same thing just with how individuals personalities can challenge societal structures.
LikeLike
-
Symbolic interactionism is how people respond to the different elements of their environment. What happens is people give meaning to these different elements through social interaction. When we give meaning to the elements that is when we get an understanding of our “self”. This concept was found to be most effective when researchers used it in a face-to-face manner. Social psychologists get a very detailed analysis this way because of how direct they can be for the answers that they are looking for. Social Psychologists will watch a person interact with the environment around them and study just what is important around them. The document said it best “SI analyses are highly detailed and give one a sense of what it is like to be a member of a particular group.” Symbolic interactionism is a very personal and intimate way to understand why someone is who they are. On the other side, the social structure and Personality are looked at the bigger picture when it comes to looking at our society. Social structure and personality takes into account all the factors that make a person up like race, ethnicity, gender, social class, and other things. These things add up to a quantitative value which then is used to better understand a person’s “self”. In short Social Structure and Personality look at the entire picture in order to determine who someone is. Both of these methods are extremely useful in trying to understand what makes up a person’s beliefs and ideals.
LikeLike
Sociology Of Health and Illness 
Leave a comment