{"id":741,"date":"2011-02-05T20:51:43","date_gmt":"2011-02-05T20:51:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.renando.com\/blog\/?p=741"},"modified":"2015-02-15T19:08:13","modified_gmt":"2015-02-15T19:08:13","slug":"self-regulation-by-reflecting-on-our-looking-glass-self-symbolic-interactionism-defined","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidewaysthoughts.com\/blog\/2011\/02\/self-regulation-by-reflecting-on-our-looking-glass-self-symbolic-interactionism-defined\/","title":{"rendered":"Self-regulation by reflecting on our looking-glass self: Symbolic interactionism defined"},"content":{"rendered":"

We act based on how we perceive others see us.\u00a0 Symbolic interactionism helps us understand why this is the case, and how we can adjust that perception to better align with who we want to be.<\/p>\n

\"Symbolic-Interactionism\"<\/p>\n

I recently commented on symbolic intetractionism as it can be applied to social media<\/a>.\u00a0 My thoughts are based on George J. McCall\u2019s<\/a> clear depiction of the concept in Contemporary Social Psychological Theories<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Please accept my further ponderings of McCall’s breakdown of the concept into distinct axioms, as much for my own benefit as to help your own understanding of how we all get along.<\/p>\n

The Axioms<\/h2>\n

Axiom A: All humans share a common nature that is unique among all animals but obscured by social differences<\/h3>\n

In my career, I have participated in top-floor meetings with multinational CEOs.\u00a0 I have also sat around back-room tables with small business owner-operators.\u00a0 I work with executives, middle managers, and graduates, often with no distinction between the roles in gender, age or nationality.\u00a0 I reflect in these situations how the role differences dictate our interactions.<\/p>\n

Reality shows such as Undercover Boss<\/a> or Survivor<\/a> prove this point.\u00a0 At the end of the show or series, the participants are often presented in full glory of their actual roles to highlight the disparity of what the viewer just experienced.<\/p>\n

Axiom B: Humans generally behave in socially proper ways<\/h3>\n

\u201cSocially proper ways\u201d are defined by our groups.\u00a0 The group culture<\/a> reinforces desirable behaviours and rejects undesirable behaviours. The configuration of good and bad behaviours is defined as our conduct.<\/p>\n

An example of this was demonstrated during the recent floods in Australia, where the media defined what was socially proper by praising tens of thousands of volunteers<\/a> and demonising looters<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Axiom C: Human conduct is self regulated<\/h3>\n

So variances in our interactions are based on our roles (Axiom A<\/strong>), and these variances are guided by our conduct (Axiom B<\/strong>).<\/p>\n

Axiom C<\/strong> outlines how and why we control and adjust this conduct within our roles, through the five sub-axioms below:<\/p>\n

Axiom C-1: A person is a social animal<\/h3>\n

Put a group of strangers in a room, they will \u201csocialise\u201d and interact in some way.\u00a0 This may be through engagement, or it may be through avoidance.\u00a0 No matter the expression, there will be some visible or felt acknowledgement of the other person.<\/p>\n

Axiom C-2: Fundamental to society is communication<\/h3>\n

The interaction of these strangers will be communicated in some way, either through verbal communication, gestures, or other forms of expressed language.<\/p>\n

All interaction is guided by our judgement of other people\u2019s actions or feelings.\u00a0 This judgement is dependent upon our ability to put ourselves in the other person\u2019s position.\u00a0 We then respond in a given situation based on viewing ourselves from their position.\u00a0 A criminal in a room full of police officers will respond differently than a sports hero at a press conference based on the individual viewing his or her self through the eyes of those in the room.<\/p>\n

Axiom C-3: Fundamental to person is mental life<\/h3>\n

Critical to this process is a \u201csocial intelligence<\/strong>\u201d.\u00a0 Viewing your actions through others requires imagination.\u00a0 Your imagination of yourself viewed by others will be more reflective of reality the greater your social intelligence.\u00a0 Like traditional intelligence, social intelligence is both inherent and learned through training and experience.<\/p>\n

Axiom C-4: The key link between society and the person is the looking glass self<\/h3>\n

As we both take action and view our actions through the eyes of others, we develop a \u201cdivided self<\/strong>\u201d.\u00a0 One part of us is focused on the task at hand, often responding through habit and natural tendency.\u00a0 A second separate part of us reflects on our actions through the eyes of others.<\/p>\n

Our membership in society is then made up of three parts: 1)<\/strong> who we are by our actions; 2)<\/strong> who we perceive ourselves to be through the eyes of others; and 3)<\/strong> who we are as a \u201csocial object\u201d defined by our society. \u00a0(Keep in mind that society is a broad statement, referring to groups such as our region, our work team, or our family).<\/p>\n

Axiom C-5: Self-regulation is a process<\/h3>\n

We can then have gaps between these three views. We change ourselves in an ongoing process by acknowledging these gaps and taking action to close the gaps.<\/p>\n

For an example of practical application<\/strong>, I may see myself as a manager of people.\u00a0 As I increase my social intelligence through experiences and study, I may view myself differently through the eyes of those I work with. \u00a0I also have a role negotiated between myself, my directors, my peers, and those I manage.\u00a0 As I acknowledge the gap between my actions and how I see myself through the eyes of others, I can alter my communication to better align my self with how I desire others to see me.\u00a0 This reflection is an ongoing self-regulating process involving ongoing communication and re-imagining others\u2019 perceptions.<\/p>\n

Reflection for application<\/h2>\n

My passion for social science is based upon the fact that it is not simply prescriptive self-help or fad.\u00a0 Theories such as symbolic interactionism (SI), supported by over a century of research, are debated statements of fact on how we are all wired up.<\/p>\n

In summary:<\/p>\n