Family Functions: Symbolic Interactionism

This article focuses on family functions as seen through a symbolic interactionist perspective. This article explores the sociology of family functions in four parts: an overview of the field of family studies; a description of symbolic interactionism and the family; a discussion of the ways in which sociologists apply the symbolic interactionist perspective to family behavior; and an exploration of the issues associated with using any single theoretical approach to analyze complex family situations, motivations, and outcomes. Understanding how symbolic interactionism is used to examine family functions is vital for all those interested in the sociology of family and relationships.

Keywords ABCX Model; Family Functions; Family Studies; Roles; Social-Conflict Theory; Social-Exchange Theory; Socialization; Society; Sociology; Symbolic Interactionism

Family Functions: Symbolic Interactionism

Overview

Sociologists study the functions that families serve for individuals and society as whole. Common family functions include teaching, socialization, nurturance, care-taking, feeding, protection, emotional support, resource sharing, and shelter. Sociologists, and social scientists in general, analyze family functions with and through different theoretical lenses or perspectives. For instance, sociologists use the theory of symbolic interactionism to understand how families create meaning. Social scientists who apply a symbolic interactionist perspective to family studies may examine the socialization process, role performance, identity formation, and meaning formation within the family.

Understanding how symbolic interactionism is used to examine family functions is vital for all those interested in the sociology of family and relationships. This article explores the sociology of family functions in four parts:

• An overview of the field of family studies

• A description of symbolic interactionism and the family

• A discussion of the ways in which sociologists apply the symbolic interactionist perspective to family behavior

• An exploration of the issues associated with using any single theoretical approach to analyze complex family situations, motivations, and outcomes

Family Studies

The field of family studies, also referred to as family science or family sociology, was established in the early twentieth century by sociologists such as Ernest Burgess, Talcott Parsons, Florian Znaniecki, William Thomas, Willard Waller, and Reuben Hill. Sociologist Ernest W. Burgess (1886–1966), who was interested in the process of social prediction, developed schemes to predict marriage success. Burgess's work on the study of marriage and family remains influential. The family, as an object of study for the sociologist, became extremely popular and important in the early twentieth century (Spanier & Stump, 1978). In the 1950s, sociologist Talcott Parsons (1902–1979) advanced the idea that the nuclear family is a social institution whose functions are determined by a functionally organized society. Sociologists believed that a family's function, purpose, and performance would be determined by factors such as a society's gendered division of labor. Mid-century sociology furthered the belief that a nuclear family was the ideal family form or construct.

Collectivity

Parsons's concept of the collectivity, a term which refers to distinct human groups united by shared social structures, identity, and customs, influenced sociological conception and understanding of the family unit. Parsons defined the parameters and characteristics necessary to create collectivities. For example, Parsons believed that a group must have loyalty toward the members and the group. Examples of loyalty include attachments, rights to relational rewards, and a commitment to act based on a system of shared standards and symbols. Parsons considers attachment to refer to a generalized system of expectations with regard to the gratifications to be received from a category of persons and generally favorable attitudes toward the qualities and performances associated with them. Members must accept the preservation of the collectivity as a moral obligation. Families often display this level of moral commitment. Parsons argued that members of a collective must develop a system of sanctions to direct behavior. The system should stress certain actions as desirable and identify other actions as hostile to and ultimately incompatible with the collective (Treudley, 1953).

Changing Family Situations

In the 1960s, family studies, led by social scientists Harold Christensen and Ira Reiss, became increasingly liberal in its choice of research topics. For instance, researchers began to study the function and effects of premarital sex and cohabitation. In the 1970s, family sociology recognized and studied the changing trends in families such as premarital sex, cohabitation, divorce, extramarital sex, homosexual relationships, childlessness, single mothers, step-families, open marriages, and group marriages. Sociologists developed and accepted the idea of an alternative lifestyle or family. Family sociology began to recognize the importance of applying integrated models, theories, and perspectives to understand complex family relationships in society. In the 1980s, family sociology continued to focus on alternative families and individuation. Multiple competing family models emerged to account for the diversity of modern and postmodern families. In the 1990s, family sociology recognized the existence of the postmodern family that defies categorization with its diffuse boundaries and evolving composition.

Family studies' changing subjects reflect the changes occurring in society. Families changed throughout the twentieth century as a result of immigration, modernization, world wars, civil rights, and women's rights. Sociologists have analyzed and reported on the evolution of the traditional or functional family, liberal family, alternative family, and the postmodern family. Family sociologists study a wide range of family relations and family structures. Examples include marriage across life span, mate selection, sexual behavior, parenthood, family planning, retirement, sex roles, divorce, premarital sexual relations, contraception, cohabitation, extramarital sexual relations, homosexual relationships, group marriage, open marriage, adoption, voluntary childlessness, communal living, single parent households, and step families (Jallinoja, 1994).

Symbolic Interactionism & the Family

Researchers use different, and sometimes multiple, theoretical lenses or perspectives to analyze families. The symbolic interactionist perspective has been used to understand how families make shared meaning since the beginning of family studies in the early 1900s. Symbolic interactionism studies the meanings of social exchanges and interactions and asserts that individuals find meaning through interaction with their social and physical environment. The human mind, as conceived in the symbolic interaction framework, filters, interprets, interacts, symbolizes, values, reflects, conceptualizes, and defines to make meaning. Symbolic interactionism is concerned with self-images, roles, interaction, and meaning making and focuses on reward and cost in relation to perceived meaning and interpretation. Symbolic interactionism also focuses on how individuals use symbols to create meaning in their lives and society. Symbolic interactionism examines face-to-face and mediated interactions in groups and societies. With its focus on meaning and interpreting, symbolic interactionism explains how individuals define exchange, rewards, and cost in their daily lives. The symbolic interaction framework includes two main branches: the Chicago School and the Iowa School.

The Interactionist Perspective

Mead

The theory of symbolic interactionism is based on the theory of interactionism. The theory of interactionism, developed by George Hebert Mead, Herbert Blumer, and Anthony Giddens, is a sociological theory that studies and locates meaning within the self in social interaction. Interactionism advances the notion that individuals are social actors who can influence society. The interactionist approach or perspective, which focuses on the development and experience of the self, finds meaning within the moment of contact between two or more actors. Interactionism, which employs an interpretive methodology, attempts to understand how individual realities, values, perceptions, feelings, and behaviors influence interactions and meaning making.

Blumer

Sociologist Herbert Blumer (1900–1987) advanced the theory of symbolic interactionism in sociological thought and practice. Building on the work of his mentor, George Herbert Mead, Blumer's symbolic interactionism locates meaning in social interactions. According to Blumer, social actors ascribe meaning to things based on the their experiences and social interactions. Meaning, in this theoretical system, is an interpretive and evolving process. Symbolic interactionism emerged as the leading paradigm of qualitative sociology (Snow, 2001).

Giddens

Sociologist Anthony Giddens, born in 1938, contributed to the development of symbolic interactionism. Giddens is best known for his theory of structuration. Giddens's theory of structuration looks for meaning in social practices ordered across space and time rather than in the actions of individual actors. Giddens was critical of classical functionalism and structuralism for overlooking the role of actors in society. He predicted that a new meaning-based synthesis would occur in sociology to replace the competing sociological theories of the past century (Camic & Gross, 1998). Contemporary sociologists, as described in the following section, apply the theory of symbolic interactionism, developed by George Hebert Mead, Herbert Blumer, and Anthony Giddens, to understand family meaning making.

Symbolic interactionist studies of families tend to focus on socialization and roles by examining the process of socialization to learn how values and norms are constructed and transmitted. Socialization is possibly the strongest family function which continues today across diverse cultures. The symbolic interactionist perspective on familial socialization focuses on newborn care, manners, rules, dress, language, food, and education. Symbolic interactionism includes a concern with and focus on social roles. Sociologists, using a symbolic interactionist approach, may examine role making, role definition, role identity, or role reversal in families to understand how self-identity is constructed. Role analysis is based on the notion that identity, a concept which evolves over a life-span, is made and performed through social roles.

Applications

Ernest Burgess

Social scientists who apply a symbolic interactionist perspective to family studies examine the process of socialization, role performance, identity formation, and meaning formation. Influential scholars who have applied the symbolic interactionist perspective to family research include Ernest Burgess, Florian Znaniecki, William Thomas, Willard Waller, and Reuben Hill. Burgess is credited with being one of the first to apply the theory of symbolic interactionism to family studies or family sociology. According to Burgess, a family is a unit of interacting individuals within which individual roles and selves are defined and formed. Burgess viewed the dynamic interaction of families as a meaning-making activity. Sociologists have found it methodologically challenging to adopt Burgess's approach and study whole family dynamics over extended periods of time.

Florian Znaniecki & William Thomas

Sociologists Florian Znaniecki (1882–1958) and William Thomas (1863–1947) used a symbolic interactionist perspective to research and write their influential study entitled "The Polish Peasant in Europe and America" (1918). This work analyzes the changes that occurred in immigrant families as they moved from Poland to the United States during the early twentieth century. Znaniecki and Thomas used a biographical approach to understanding their subject of immigrant life and culture. According to Znaniecki and Thomas, individual understanding, perception, and interpretation of events makes these events real.

Willard Waller

Sociologist Willard Waller (1899–1945) also used a symbolic interactionist lens to analyze family patterns and units. Waller was particularly interested in the effects of divorce, education, and war on families. Waller, like Znaniecki and Thomas, used qualitative methods to study families. For instance, Waller used case studies and novels as a means of gaining insight into the family dynamics of conflict, exchange, and exploitation. He was particularly interested in the power balances that form in marriages and dating couples.

Reuben Hill

Sociologist Reuben Hill used a symbolic interactionist perspective to analyze the effect that stress has on families. Hill's work has significantly influenced the field of family studies. For instance, researchers tend to use Hill's ABCX model when the subject calls for a more analytical than personal or biographical approach. Hill's ABCX model is an expression of Hill's theory of family stress. Following the Great Depression, Hill studied families to see which ones survived and which ones disbanded or separated. Hill worked to understand what factors and stressors influence family survival. In Hill's ABCX theory of family stress, the A variable refers to family stressors such as job loss or conflict. The B variable refers to the internal and external resources and support available to the family. The C variable refers to a family's shared perception and awareness of events. The X variable refers to the resulting family resolution or crisis. Educators and social workers use Hill's ABCX theory of family stress to predict potential family problems and explore how families can protect themselves from negative stressors (McDonald, 1998).

Steven Derne

Symbolic interactionist studies of families have from their beginning been international and cross-cultural in nature. Families interpret global artifacts, such as global immigration, cultural imperialism, foreign media, ethnic fighting, new political regimes, and changing gender roles, based on their resources and shared understanding of the world. For instance, social scientist Steven Derne used the symbolic interactionist perspective to analyze how gendered culture functions in Indian families. Derne conducted extensive ethnographic research on north Indian male views on female behavior, family structures, and the tension between individual desires and collective expectations. Derne examined roles and socialization to understand how these family functions maintained and protected the interested of larger interests such as the extended family, caste group, and neighborhood (Derne, 1995).

Issues

The Multiple Theory Approach to Family Studies

While symbolic interactionism is a popular theoretical approach to family research, critics argue that symbolic interactionism, or any single theoretical approach, is insufficient for understanding complex family situations, motivations, and outcomes. Family scientists are increasingly calling for greater integration of family theories and methodologies across disciplines. For instance, applied family science uses multiple theoretical perspectives to address clinical family issues. Applied family science, such as marital and family therapy, works to address family dysfunction through the integration of multiple disciplines and perspectives. The National Council on Family Relations, which offers certifications in family life education, acknowledges that there is an increased need for an integrated approach to family studies involving multiple theoretical perspectives and methodologies. Rather than discrete theoretical perspectives, family studies may be strengthened by the adoption of a multiple theory approach practiced by multi-domain specialists or integrationists (Voik, 1989).

A multiple theoretical approach to family studies might include complimentary theories such as symbolic interactionism, social-exchange theory, and social-conflict theory. Symbolic interactionism is often applied in research in combination with other complimentary theories such as social-exchange theory, and social-conflict theory. Broad theoretical perspectives are applied to the family unit in general as well as specific areas of family behavior and organization. Distinct theoretical perspectives, such as symbolic interactionism, social-exchange theory, and social-conflict theory, provide family researchers different lenses with which to analyze family dynamics and functions. Theoretical perspectives are used as lenses and conceptual frameworks. Different theoretical perspectives applied to the same family issue, behavior, and phenomenon will yield different data, results, and conclusions. Some researchers choose to adopt a multiple perspective approach to family studies while others choose to employ a single perspective analysis. Researchers consider symbolic interactionism, social-exchange theory, and social-conflict theory to be complimentary theoretical perspectives. Applied social scientists use the multiple-theoretical approach to understand and in some cases treat clinical family problems such as marital discord.

Social-Exchange Theory

Social-exchange theory studies the investments and returns of relationships. Social-exchange theory studies the exchanges of commodities, resources, and skills that occur in small social systems such as dyads and triads. Social-exchange theory suggests that individuals attempt to maximize rewards and minimize costs in the interest of maximizing profit. Social-exchange theory argues that individuals evaluate rewards, costs, and profits based on an agreed upon standard. When costs and outcomes exceed the expected amount or differ in expected type, the individual or group will experience dissatisfaction and seek alternative redress. In some instances, individuals who experience a relationship as inequitable will leave the relationship and seek other connections. Social-exchange theory explains what motivates individual action but does not explain how people make choices between different behaviors and actions. Critics of social-exchange theory argue that the theory does not articulate or define rewards, costs, and profits. The theory dos not recognize the subjective or interpretive experience of reward or cost for different individuals.

Social-Conflict Theory

Social-conflict theory studies how exchanges are managed and mediated in relationships. Conflict theory asserts that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome of all human interactions. Conflict is not viewed as disruptive or bad but rather an important part of all interactions including marriages and parent-child relationships. Conflict, once it is recognized and managed, can strengthen relationships. In these instances, conflict is a positive force. Family, like all social institutions, has inherent conflict within its organization, boundaries, and roles. Conflict theory asserts that conflict most often arises from inequitable relationships. The unequal exchange between partners or parties breeds conflict and resentments. Conflict resolution requires three main components: communication, assessment of type and degree of conflict, and genuine efforts at resolution. Conflict often leads to the reorganization of exchange relationships.

Sociologists study conflict as a means of understanding interpersonal relations and social change. Social-conflict analysis refers to the analytical perspective used to understand the role and function of social conflict and resolution. There are many different types of conflict and resolution techniques. Conflict occurs at the interpersonal, intergroup, communal, and international levels. There are numerous theories explaining the origins and purpose of conflict. Social-conflict theory, the theory upon which social-conflict analysis is based, argues that social systems operate to support the interests of the most powerful. According to social-conflict theory, conflict is natural and important. Conflict is considered to be an inherent part of human behavior and social systems. Conflict is a fundamental impetus for personal, interpersonal, and social change. When sociologists study conflict, they examine the onset, process, and aftermath of the conflict.

• Onset refers to the precipitating issue and the social context in which conflict occurs.

• Process refers to the level of involvement, emotional reactions, negotiation strategies, and resolution techniques.

• Aftermath refers to the relationship repair and emotional reactions of those involved (Raffaellie, 1992).

Ultimately, symbolic interactionism, social-exchange theory, and social-conflict theory are complimentary perspectives that make up for the deficits and weaknesses inherent in each solitary perspective. A multiple-perspective approach may lead to insights that individual or isolated perspectives or theories will overlook (Rank & LeCroy, 1983).

Conclusion

In the final analysis, sociologists use the theory of symbolic interactionism to understand how families create meaning. Social scientists who apply a symbolic interactionist perspective to family studies may examine the socialization process, role performance, identity formation, and meaning formation within the family. This article explored the sociology of family functions in four parts: an overview of the field of family studies; a description of symbolic interactionism and the family; a discussion of the ways in which sociologists apply the symbolic interactionist perspective to family behavior; and an exploration of the issues associated with using any single theoretical approach to analyze complex family situations, motivations, and outcomes. Understanding how symbolic interactionism is used to examine family functions is vital for all those interested in the sociology of family and relationships.

Terms & Concepts

ABCX Model: Sociologist Reuben Hill's theory of family stress.

Family Functions: The behaviors, rules, and habits that operate to maintain the family unit.

Family Studies: A social science field, also referred to as family science or family sociology, concerned with the function and dynamics of families.

Roles: Pre-scripted identity performances.

Social-Conflict Theory: A social theory based in the idea that conflict is a natural and inevitable outcome of all human interactions.

Social-Exchange Theory: A theory focusing on the investments and returns of relationships.

Socialization: The process of conveying norms and values to the young in a society.

Society: A group of individuals united by values, norms, culture, or organizational affiliation.

Sociology: The scientific study of human social behavior, human association, and the results of social activities.

Symbolic Interactionism: A sociological theory that locates meaning in social interactions.

Bibliography

Bokemeier, J. (1997). Rediscovering families and households: Restructuring rural society and rural sociology. Rural Sociology, 62 , 1–20. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9707225779&site=ehost-live

Brick, H. (2004). Review of Talcott Parsons: An intellectual biography. The Journal of American History, 91 , 1086–1087.

Camic, C. & Gross, N. (1998). Contemporary development in sociological theory: Current projects and conditions of possibility. Annual Review of Sociology, 24 , 453–477. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=1056949&site=ehost-live

Derne, S. (1995). Culture in action: Family life, emotion, and male dominance in Banaras, India . Albany: State University of New York Press.

Gilgun, J. F. (2012). Enduring themes of qualitative family research. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 4, 80–95. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=76274647

Heiss, J. (1980). Family theory 20 years later. Contemporary Sociology, 9 , 201–204. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13366500&site=ehost-live

Interaction and Symbolic Interactionism. (2011). Symbolic Interaction, 34, 315–318. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=65923544

Jallinoja, R. (1994). Alternative family patterns: Their lot in family sociology and in the life-worlds of ordinary people. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, 7 , 15-27. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9604120728&site=ehost-live

McDonald, L. (1998). A multi-family approach: Families and schools together (FAST) builds protective factors in potentially neglectful families. Parenthood in America. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from http://parenthood.library.wisc.edu/McDonald/McDonald.html

Pagnan, C. E., Lero, D. S., & MacDermid Wadsworth, S. M. (2011). It doesn't always add up: Examining dual-earner couples' decision to off-shift. Community, Work & Family, 14, 297–316. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=63204229

Parsons, T. (1956) Family Socialization and Interaction Process, London.

Raffaelli, Marcela (1992). Sibling conflict in early adolescence. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54 , 652.

Rank, M., & LeCroy, C. (1983). Toward a multiple perspective in family theory and practice: The case of social-exchange theory , symbolic interactionism, and conflict theory. Family Relations, 32 , 441–448. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=4699452&site=ehost-live

Snow, D. (2001). Extending and broadening Blumer's conceptualization of symbolic interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 24 , 367–377.

Spanier, G., & Stump, C. (1978). The use of research in applied marriage and family textbooks. Contemporary Sociology, 7 , 553–563. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13332188&site=ehost-live

Treudley, M. (1953). The ethnic group as a collectivity. Social Forces, 31 , 261–265. Retrieved August 23, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database: SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=13546055&site=ehost-live

Voik, R. (1989). The need for integration among theory, research, and application in family science: An update. Family Relations, 38 , 220. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=4703883&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Connidis, I., & Mcmullin, J. (2002). Ambivalence, family ties, and doing sociology. Journal of Marriage & Family, 64 , 594–601. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=7063883&site=ehost-live

Farber, B. (1975). Theory construction and the sociology of the family (Book). Contemporary Sociology, 4 , 256–257. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13316462&site=ehost-live

Janning, M., Collins, C., & Kamm, J. (2011). Gender, space, and objects in divorced families. Michigan Family Review, 15, 35–58. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=61252172

Lavee, Y., & Dollahite, D. (1991). The linkage between theory and research in family science. Journal of Marriage & Family, 53 , 361–373. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=9106173735&site=ehost-live

Paat, Y. (2013). Relationship dynamics and healthy exchange across the family life cycle: Implications for practice. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23, 938–953. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=91536767