Search results

The purpose of this conceptual chapter is to analyze the current state of the astructural bias in symbolic interactionism as it relates to three inter-related processes over time: (1) the formalization of critiques of symbolic interactionism as ahistorical, astructural, and acritical perspectives; (2) an ahistorical understanding of early expressions of the disjuncture between symbolic interactionism and more widely accepted forms of sociological theorizing; and (3) persistent and widespread inattentiveness to past and present evidence-based arguments that address the argument regarding symbolic interactionism as an astructural, ahistorical, and acritical sociological perspective. The argument frames the historical development of the astructural bias concept in an historically and socially conditioned way, from its emergence through its rejection and ultimately including conclusions about contemporary state of the astructural bias as evidenced in the symbolic interactionist literatures of the last couple of decades. The analysis and argument concludes that the contemporary result of these intertwined historical and social conditioning processes is that the astructural bias myth has been made real in practice, and that the reification of the myth of an astructural bias has had the ruinous effect of virtually eradicating a vital tradition in the interactionist perspective which extends back to the earliest formulations of the perspective. As a result, a handful of suggestions that serve to aid in reclaiming the unorthodox structuralism of symbolic interactionism and the related interactionist study of social organization are provided in the conclusion.

My project is to develop a phenomenological, constructionist, symbolic interactionist theory of the narrative productions of meaning in the public realm. Situated within our globalized, technologically mediated world characterized by extraordinary social, political, economic, and moral fragmentation, my basic question is quite practical: How can public communication be understandable and persuasive to audiences whose experiences, world views, and moral sensibilities are so different? Here I explore how the more-or-less widely shared systems of meaning in symbolic codes and emotion codes are incorporated into narratives that circulate in the public sphere. I conclude with arguing that more attention by symbolic interactionists to these productions of meaning would be good for the study of culture and good for symbolic interactionism.

In this chapter, the approach of radical interactionism is juxtaposed against symbolic interactionism, its older conservative turned rival cousin, to highlight primarily the major differences between them. The five key differences identified are as follows: (1) the major progenitors for symbolic interactionism are Mead and Blumer, while those for radical interactionism are Park and, by default, myself; (2) although radical interactionism presumes that domination and power are always of great importance for understanding human group life, symbolic interactionism assumes that they now have only limited importance for understanding it; (3) radical interactionism makes it mandatory for researchers to examine the role of dominance and power during social interaction, whereas symbolic interactionism makes it only discretionary; (4) while radical interactionism stresses the impact of individuals’ and groups’ unstated assumptions on their interaction with one another, symbolic interactionism de-emphasizes their impact on it; and finally (5) radical interactionism discourages, while symbolic interactionism encourages researchers falling into the trap of linguistic phenomenalism. Thus, unlike radical interactionism, symbolic interactionism facilitates sociologists not only falling prey to linguistic phenomenalism, but also conservative and idealistic biases, while allegedly conducting “value-free research.”

This chapter examines the issue of the “astructural bias” critique of symbolic interactionist theory and research practice by reconsidering the conception of structure in light of work within the French social theoretical tradition that reflects upon this concept. Proceeding through the work of Georges Bataille, Jean Baudrillard, and Marshall Sahlins, the chapter examines the evolving theorization of symbolic structures. Bataille’s theory of the “general economy” and the “labyrinth” provides an initial expansion of the concept of structures and formulating symbolic practices as fundamental to the structuring of the social order. Baudrillard expands this work on symbolic structures with his analysis of symbolic exchange and seduction, taking Bataille’s initial work into a more nuanced analytical perspective and applies it to a range of cultural practices, including fashion, an area of particular interest to symbolic interactionism. Marshall Sahlins, directly influenced by Baudrillard, refines much of this thinking through his theorization of cultural reason, and provides anthropological field research to illustrate some of this theory, taking this thought into more conventional social scientific territory and offering examples of its methodological possibilities. The chapter suggests that symbolic interactionists can move from a defensive position regarding the presumed astructural character of their work to a more positive case for its status as a particularly acute form of engagement with a range of social structures.

In this paper, we discuss how “cultural capital” and “symbolic capital,” understood as specialized subsets of intangible resources and capabilities, enable firms to achieve valuable strategic positions in ways that are currently underexplored by mainstream strategy literature. We articulate the similarities and differences between cultural and symbolic capital and the intangible assets that have been the focus of mainstream strategy researchers, such as intellectual, social, and reputational capital. Our theoretical arguments build on insights from a number of studies conducted primarily in non-North American settings that have shown how symbolic properties of products create value. We conclude by delineating future avenues of research that strategy scholarship should consider in order to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the relationships between intangible resources and capabilities, and value creation.

The place of G. H. Mead’s works in symbolic interactionism is both central and paradoxical. It stands at the very foundation of Hebert Blumer’s initial invention of symbolic interactionism with respect to Mead’s social behaviorism and has been discussed and debated ever since because of the problems caused by such a presumed direct filiation. Returning to Mead in order to broaden the perspective offered by Blumer is a must and has to face some fundamental issues raised in this context. This article starts by examining the ontogenetic and phylogenetic processes involved in Mead’s concept of society, in order to show the multiple dimensions involved in significant symbols. An illustration of Mead’s wider perspective is given in reference to the feminist movement as analyzed first by Mead’s student, Jessie Taft, and goes back to the origin of the movement with Mary Wollstonecraft. This leads to the analysis of the debate about the place of power in symbolic interactionism, initiated by Peter M. Hall, and addresses the alternative between domination and emancipation. This alternative has been worked out by Lonnie Athen’s radical symbolic interactionism analysis of domination on the one side, and by Kathy Charmaz and Norman K. Denzin on the other side of emancipatory symbolic interactionist practices. Another solution is proposed to this alternative, with the analysis of power being intrinsically constituted by domination and emancipation, in their respective contribution to the understanding of the symbolic dispositions of autonomy – a concept that remains relatively undeveloped in Mead’s works.

Middle-aged and elderly users become an important group on short-video platforms, however, the research on determinants of their video-creating intention is limited. Based on lifespan development theories, this study examines the impact of aging experiences on their video-creating intention, considering internal generative motivations as mediators and age as a moderator.

To test this study’s hypotheses, survey data from 321 Chinese middle-aged and elderly short-video users were collected and partial least square-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) approach was used to analyze these data.

Middle-aged and elderly users' aging experiences of social loss and personal growth are positively related to their video-creating intention. Aging experiences (i.e. physical loss, social loss, and personal growth) are positively related to internal generative motivations (i.e. need to be needed and symbolic immortality), and need to be needed is positively related to video-creating intention. Via the mediation of need to be needed, physical loss and personal growth are indirectly positively related to video-creating intention. Personal growth strengthens the relationship between physical loss and symbolic immortality, but weakens the associations of social loss with need to be needed and symbolic immortality. Age weakens the relationship between symbolic immortality and video-creating intention.

This study is the first wave to introduce and integrate lifespan theories such as selective optimization with compensation model, socioemotional selectivity theory, and generativity theory to explore the impacts of aging experiences on middle-aged and elderly users' video-creating intention by considering generativity motivations as mediators and age as a moderator.

The process of elaboration of the symbolic universe leads to important insights into the role of symbols in understanding human reasoning. Symbols become explanatory axes of universal global realities. Myths were constructed on these explanatory paths forming a superstructure of all belief systems with paraconsistent logic for the symbolism and a symbolic syntax. Myths and symbols are to be found in all cultures. Some of the most powerful and influential ones occur in popular culture since these often have the greatest immediate social impact.

Semiotic and logical development of the symbols is in mythical systems. The dissolution of the myth and the degradation of the myth's symbols constitute a long-drawn-out process in modern Western society and wherever s influence reaches. Myth is a story that may contain symbolic elements, but compared to the symbols or images of the exceptional, myth is characterized by a “story.”

Starting from a minimal definition to define myths and propose the following definition: Myth is a traditional tale that relates memorable and exemplary actions of extraordinary personages in prestigious and distant times, and myths have various forms and functions, perhaps some more clearly defined with a signifier than others, and different approaches can be combined for a better understanding of the myths. Dispensing with such simplistic assertions, and starting from a minimal definition to define myth, myth is a traditional tale that relates memorable and exemplary actions of extraordinary personages in prestigious and distant times.

Any symbol F originates in a unit that has two aspects and functions when the unit is restored. Thus, the symbol is rather “for something” than “of something” and the symbolic objects express the objects' correspondence in one unit or hendiadys. One semantic characteristic of symbols is “recognition”. The symbol F reveals a reality by means of the homogenous association of the signifier and significance in the symbol's constitution; although reality is separate, there is a homogeneous relation between the symbolizing and symbolized in symbolization.

In the purchase intention of green products context, researchers have mainly investigated the role of symbolism but have mostly discussed symbolic attributes/meanings in terms of social status only. This research aims to investigate the impact of four perceived symbolic meanings of green clothing (status, environmentalism, innovation and fashion symbols) on consumers' purchase intention of green clothing through their attitude toward it. Besides, the moderating role of a consumer mindset in the indirect relationship between symbolic attributes and the purchase intention of green products through consumer attitude is examined.

The data were collected through a survey from a sample of 325 respondents in Turkey, especially younger ones. The data were analyzed via confirmatory factor analysis and hypothesized relationships were tested with multiple and simple regression analyses and PROCESS macros in SPSS.

All symbolic meanings of green clothing impact purchase intention positively and indirectly through consumers' attitudes toward it. The results of moderated mediation analyses showed that the impact of symbolic meanings, except for environmentalism symbol, on purchase intention through consumer attitude was significantly moderated by the consumer mindset.

This research contributes to the under-researched areas of the impact of various symbolic attributes/meanings of green clothing on consumers' purchase intention. Besides, this study advances the role of consumer mindset in consumer behavior research in such a way that it connects mindsets of personality, consumers' attitudes toward green products and their green purchase intention. Furthermore, this study addresses the gap in regard to the role of mindsets of personality on sustainable/environmental behaviors. It will provide implications for fashion marketing managers to develop appropriate targeting, positioning and communication strategies for consumers' mindsets.

While there is anecdotal evidence that internationally mobile workers often form isolated nation-based communities or “expatriate bubbles,” previous academic scholarship on the expatriate communities and their subjective boundaries is limited. The primary purpose of this article is to advance the theoretical or conceptual understanding of expatriate communities as bubbles.

As developed by Lamont and Molnár (2002), the theory of symbolic boundaries is applied and set to scrutinize the production and maintenance of insulated expatriate communities. Empirically, an ethnographic study of a community of Finnish expatriates in a Southeast Asian country is undertaken to describe how symbolic boundaries are constructed.

The main theoretical implication of the paper is the recognition that expatriates themselves are involved in creating the “bubble.” The boundaries separating the national expatriate community are not externally imposed but can be viewed as consequences of the active boundary work of the expatriates. The empirical study demonstrates how the Finnish expatriates negotiated the symbolic boundaries of their community, drawing on cultural, moral and spatial modalities in different levels of boundary work.

There need to be more systematic attempts to develop a theoretically grounded understanding of insulated expatriate communities and their boundaries. This article contributes to the sociological conceptualization of expatriate bubbles by utilizing the symbolic boundary approach, which adds perspective to the embryonic theory of the subjective boundaries of expatriate communities. The multiplicity of different types of symbolic boundaries and their modalities suggests that an expatriate bubble is rarely a finished state or structure.