Download Symbolic Interactionism and Divorce

What Is the Symbolic Interaction Perspective in Divorce?
Sociologists rely on different theoretical models to explain social interaction and human behavior. The
three most dominant models in the field are the functionalist perspective, the conflict perspective and the
symbolic interaction perspective. The last, also known as symbolic interactionism, guides sociologists to
evaluate the "symbols" of daily life, upon which all human interaction, and thus all human relationships, are
founded. The symbolic interaction perspective is sometimes used to explain social phenomena such as
divorce.
Overview
The symbolic interaction perspective originated with Max
Weber, but gained notoriety with George Mead. This
perspective posits that individuals act according to their
interpretation of the meaning of the world. However, a
person's interpretation of the world depends upon his reading
of the different symbols and details of everyday life. For
instance, language is symbolic. Words do not summon forth
meaning on their own, but symbolize meaning which is
inferred by the people who use them.
Relationships
According to the symbolic interaction perspective,
relationships are founded on symbolic interaction. After all, persons communicate using a shared system of
symbolic interaction (language), and all cultural and social interaction is symbolic. Marriage, like all human
relationships, is facilitated by the symbolic interaction that takes place between persons. Traditionally,
persons said to have a "strong" marriage are persons who share similar interpretations of symbols. In other
words, spouses in a stable marriage read the world in a compatible way.
Miscommunication
Sometimes, divorced spouses cite miscommunication as a reason for separation. According to sociologists,
miscommunication is the natural result of symbolic interaction. After all, each individual attaches her own
personal and cultural meanings to symbols and social phenomena, and therefore each individual has different
expectations and interpretations of the world. For instance, a person raised in a religious home might read
marriage as a sacred institution. However, a person raised in a secular household might read marriage as a
cultural tradition. The symbol (marriage) becomes a source of conflict between persons who read it
differently.
Action
Action, according to the symbolic interactionist perspective, is motivated by a person's subjective
interpretation of symbols. Married persons are sometimes surprised to realize how incompatible their actions
and behaviors are. But if people read the world differently, it is only natural that they respond to the world in
different ways. The symbolic interaction perspective accounts for the rising number of divorces by pointing to
an increasingly diverse world. Historically, people married within religious and socioeconomic groups.
However, people marry across culture, religion, ethnicity and socioeconomic status are likely to think, act and
behave differently, since their upbringings inspired conflicting interpretations of the symbols in the world.
Looking Glass Self
The looking-glass self is a theory within symbolic interactionism devised by Charles Cooley which tries to
explain the formation of self-image via reflection.
Three Main Components of The Looking Glass Self:
 One imagines how they appear to others.
 One imagines the judgment that others may be making regarding that appearance.
 One develops a self-image via their reflection; that is, the judgments or critique of others.
-According to the theory, most people imagine how they must look to others, how their actions appear to
those observing, and finally – changing themselves or perhaps rebelling against change due to the judgments
of others they interact with. A large portion of personalities are determined by the reactions to appearance,
speech, beliefs, actions, and so on.
-The reflections, or impressions, that people gain from other people in society are formative in nature – from
the look on a doting mother's face to that of a stern father when one has stolen a cookie from the jar – human
beings are influenced by the exchange of symbols, and from the reactions one gains from those exchanges,
from early infancy.
-The looking glass self is directly related to self-awareness; indeed, self-awareness may be said to be formed
via this process popularized by Cooley.
-The concept is somewhat related to the psychological concept of projection; human beings interpret the
reactions of others that they socialize with in regards to appearance, speech, reactions…and project these
interpretations unto themselves.
-hen people receive a negative or condescending response to their appearance from a variety of persons they
socialize with, they might begin to view themselves as less physically attractive or appealing. Conversely, when
they receive a positive or encouraging response to jokes or comedy, they become more apt to engage in these
social behaviours or to take pride in their verbal skills.
-In this way, people are directly moulded, influenced, and in some cases entirely built up around the
reflections of themselves that they see in others.
The medium used to express these feelings, especially in the earliest stages of development, is the realm of
symbolic interaction-Not all cues are verbal, but a simple frown, snort of disdain, or look of amusement are all
symbols which bear greater social meanings.
-One's self-awareness is thus heavily influenced by these social responses, and to some degree persons
become reflections of what they see projected unto them by others – a summation of the symbolic
interactions and exchanges between their selves and "the other(s)."