Ethnography and Symbolic Interactionism: A Comprehensive Overview
Evolution of Ethnography
Auguste Comte and the Comparative Method
Auguste Comte’s identification of three stages of development common to all cultures paved the way for early ethnographers. This framework, however, limited researchers to fitting their findings into pre-established phases.
Ethnography in the 20th Century
The post-World War II decolonization process triggered a shift in ethnographic perspectives. The previous focus on “primitive” and “underdeveloped” cultures, while suggesting common evolutionary steps, came under scrutiny, leading to a search for new, more critical visions.
Ethnography of the American Indian
The study of American Indians provided a unique lens through which to understand the past. This approach, often categorized as “prehistoric,” offered insights into cultural evolution and diversity.
Ethnography and Civic Integration
Studies focusing on the integration of diverse populations, such as African Americans, into existing structures, like the Protestant church, emerged. These studies often examined the concept of assimilation and its societal implications.
Assimilation and Ethnicity (1950-1980)
Numerous studies during this period explored the process of assimilation, often revealing the challenges and limitations of achieving complete integration. This led to a search for new approaches to understanding cultural interaction.
The Postmodern Challenge
Postmodernism brought a significant shift in ethnographic practice. Ethnographers were no longer content with mere observation; they recognized the ethical and political implications of their work. This led to a more self-critical and participatory approach, moving away from detached observation towards engaged research.
Denzin and Lincoln’s Five Phases of Ethnography
- Traditional Phase: This phase aligns with Vidich and Lyman’s early stages, where the “other” is studied as different and exotic. Researchers like Malinowski, Radcliffe-Brown, Bateson, and Mead focused on objective reporting.
- Modernist or Golden Age: This phase emphasized rigorous qualitative analysis. Researchers like Glaser, Strauss, and Becker (Boys in White) sought to apply concepts of internal and external validity to their work, drawing on constructionist and interactionist models.
- Blurred Genres: This phase saw a blurring of boundaries between social sciences and humanities. Ethnographic works incorporated elements of fiction, theory, and even travel writing. New approaches like neo-positivism, neo-Marxism, and constructivism emerged.
- Crisis of Representation: Emerging in the mid-1980s, this phase brought a critical examination of representation and legitimacy in ethnographic research. Issues of validity and reliability were central to this critique.
- Fifth Moment: This phase is characterized by the coexistence of diverse paradigms and methods. Researchers embrace a more active and critical approach, focusing on local contexts and specific problems rather than grand theories.
Throughout these evolving approaches, a common thread remains: the significance of subjective meaning. Understanding how individuals and cultures make sense of their experiences is paramount in ethnographic research.
Symbolic Interactionism
Herbert Blumer coined the term “symbolic interactionism” in 1937, building upon the foundations laid by Cooley and Mead. This perspective emphasizes the role of symbols and meanings in shaping social interaction.
Five Basic Premises of Symbolic Interactionism:
- Human beings are distinguished by their capacity for thought, which is shaped through social interaction.
- Meanings and symbols, essential for human thought, arise from interactions with others.
- Individuals manipulate and modify meanings and symbols based on their interpretation of the interaction.
- Humans can engage in self-interaction, evaluating different courses of action before choosing one.
- Collective action emerges from the interconnected actions of individuals, forming the field of sociology.
Blumer argued that while larger structures provide context and limitations, they don’t determine action. Individuals actively interpret and utilize symbols to guide their behavior.
Research Implications
Symbolic interactionism emphasizes understanding how individuals give meaning to their experiences. Researchers aim to reconstruct subjective viewpoints, requiring empathy and the ability to see the world from the subjects’ perspectives. Quantitative methods are often deemed insufficient for capturing the nuances of subjective interpretation.
Criticisms
of this theory are:
Objectivity and validity criteria.
Descriptivism and critical lack of social commitment.
The problem of authority and privilege accorded to the researcher as interpreter.
Some confusion of psychological aspects are epistemological aspects of knowledge.
2. Ethnomethodology
Try to overcome the limitations of symbolic interaction derived from an interest in the views of the subject.
Founded in 1967 by Harold Garfinkel their best interest lies in studying the methods used by individuals to produce the reality of everyday life.
The aim is to focus on ways that the components of a group manipulate, reproduce and give meaning to social interaction (ethnomethodological indifference) and most studies have focused on the talks, the study of everyday speech, in the discourse and interaction.