Home UPSC optional Sociology Paper 01 Sociology as Science Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic Interactionism is a major sociological perspective associated primarily with George Herbert Mead and Charles Horton Cooley. Cooley’s famous idea of the “Looking Glass Self” explains how individuals develop their identity through social interactions and perceived judgments of others. For example, if a person is repeatedly praised for being intelligent, they begin to internalise this idea and construct a self-concept around it.

At its core, symbolic interactionism argues that people act toward things based on the meanings those things hold for them, and these meanings are created, communicated, and altered through social interaction and interpretation. Like Weber, symbolic interactionists focus on understanding action through meaning, but they emphasise micro-level interactions, examining everyday encounters rather than structural change.

Central Ideas of Symbolic Interactionism

1. Humans are inherently social beings

Behaviour develops through interaction.
Example: A child learns social behaviour by observing and engaging with parents, teachers, and peers.

2. Humans are thinking and reflective beings

Individuals make decisions through internal reasoning.
Example: Before buying something, a person evaluates cost, usefulness, and past experiences.

3. People interpret situations rather than simply respond to them

Two individuals can experience the same physical environment but define it differently, shaping different behaviours.

4. People actively shape their environment

Humans influence their surroundings through action.
Example: Climate activists mobilise movements to change behaviour and policy.

Mead’s Contributions

Mead argued that interaction occurs through symbols, especially language, which allows individuals to recognise, remember, and interpret the world.

He described thought as “Minding”—an internal conversation where individuals pause to reflect before acting.
For example, a student silently thinking before answering a question demonstrates this reflective process.

Mead also distinguished between:

“Me” – the socially conditioned self shaped by roles and expectations
“I” – the spontaneous, creative self that emerges in interaction

Together, these form identity and guide social action.

Basic Principles of Symbolic Interactionism

Humans can think
Example: People evaluate job offers based on reflection and reasoning.
Thinking develops through interaction
Example: Children develop problem-solving abilities through games, guidance, and peer learning.
Meanings are fluid and change with interpretation
Example: Critical feedback that initially seems negative can later be reinterpreted as constructive, altering response and behaviour.

Criticisms of Symbolic Interactionism

Overemphasis on micro-level interaction
Critics argue it ignores larger structures like economy, history, and institutions.
Downplays constraints on human behaviour
In rigid environments—such as authoritarian states—interaction and meaning-making are restricted.
Unclear source of meaning
Critics note that meanings emerge from institutional and structural contexts, not merely individual negotiation.
Weak empirical testability
Concepts like self, meaning, and interpretation are difficult to measure and generalise.

Thus, while symbolic interactionism offers insights into identity, communication, and subjective experience, it is criticised for lack of structural focus and limited predictive power.

Important Keywords

Positivism, Non-positivism, Symbolic Interactionism, G.H. Mead, C.H. Cooley, Looking Glass Self, Meaning, Minding, “Me” and “I”, Micro-sociology, Social Interaction.

Welcome to Primus Civil Services Academy