Social Constructionism and Symbolic Interactionism
Overview
Social Constructionism and Symbolic Interactionism are two sociological perspectives that have been influential in recent decades. While their originators, George Herbert Mead and Peter Berger, respectively, had somewhat different origins, the perspectives are now closely associated. In essence, they both argue that the meanings that people assign to their social experiences are key to understanding human behavior. By emphasizing human agency in constructing meanings, both perspectives have become fundamental to the field of sociology. In this paper, I will discuss the basic conversations of each, and then propose ways in which the two perspectives integrate to form a more comprehensive sociological perspective.
Social Constructionism
Social constructionism, as described by Berger and Luckman (1966), is the idea that “human beings actively create the social world and the meanings associated with it.” It is a micro-level perspective that seeks to explain how human interactions are shaped by the subjective meanings people assign to them. Social constructionism claims that the process of assigning meanings to social objects is a creative process that relies on the individual’s particular set of experiences and is thus unique to each person. Consequently, the meanings that people assign to their own experiences, as well as the experiences of others, help to shape the social world.
Symbolic Interactionism
Symbolic interactionism, as pioneered by George Herbert Mead (1934), is a social psychological perspective which focuses on the essential role of individuals in the development and maintenance of societies. It emphasizes the power of language and symbols in providing people with the ability to interpret their environment and create shared understanding of their social worlds. Symbolic interactionism claims that the meanings people assign to symbols and events are highly individualistic and depend on social contexts and cultural norms. Furthermore, it argues that human behavior is shaped by the meanings that individuals attribute to their interaction with others.
Integration
The various symbolic and constructionist perspectives of sociology need not be mutually exclusive. In fact, each perspective can provide a unique lens through which to understand social behavior while reinforcing the other. First, social constructionism can provide insight into how people interpret their experiences of the world, while symbolic interactionism can provide a more detailed understanding of how the meanings people assign become normative behavior. Furthermore, both perspectives can be used to explore how these behaviours interact with each other and produce social and cultural change. Finally, the integration of these two perspectives can shed light on the micro-level processes of meanings and individual behaviour that, in turn, lead to macro-level social structures, processes and dynamics.
Conclusion
In conclusion, social constructionism and symbolic interactionism have become two of the most prominent perspectives in contemporary sociology. While the two perspectives have different starting points, by combining them together a more comprehensive understanding of individual and group behaviour can be achieved. In particular, social constructionism and symbolic interactionism can be used to examine the creative process of meaning-making, the behavioural expressions of cultural values, and how both of these processes interact to produce social change.
