Chapter 4: From Social Interaction to Social Organizations

Social interaction

Involves people communicating face to face or via computer, acting and reacting in relation to other people. It is structured around norms, roles, and statuses.Three building blocks that structure all social ​interactions: ​

1. Status – recognized social position (e.g., student, driver).

2. Role – expected behaviours associated with a status (e.g., class clown entertaining peers).

3. Norms – shared rules for conduct (e.g., teachers discourage clowning in class).

People can occupy several statuses at the same time, such as mother, wife, and teacher, as shown in this figure. When considered together, these statuses form a…

status set. Similarly, role sets are made up of all the roles (expected behaviours) for each status. For example, the expected behaviours associated with the status of wife include being an intimate companion and assuming certain responsibilities as a manager of the household.

Role conflict

occurs when two or more statuses held at the same time place contradictory role demands on a person.

Role strain

occurs when incompatible role demands are placed on a person in a single status.

Emotion Management

• Involves people obeying “feeling rules” and responding appropriately to situations. ​

• Example: During a grizzly bear attack, you might choose to:

  • Run in panic (lose control).

  • OR play dead and stay calm (manage fear for survival).

• Even in extreme situations, people can modify emotional responses (e.g., fear → hope).

Who cries more at funerals—men or women? Why?

Common View of Emotions

Emotions are often thought to be involuntary, like the common cold:

• External event (e.g., virus, grizzly bear) → automatic emotional/physical response (e.g., fear, sneezing).

• Seen as something that “just happens” to us.

Feminist Sociologists' Critique:

• Emotions are not purely involuntary.

• Women, often in lower status positions, are expected to manage their emotions (e.g., hide anger, stay polite).

• Therefore, emotional expression is often socially controlled and structured.

How People Get Emotional

External Stimulus—-Physiological response and initial emotion—-Cultural Script—-Modified emotional response

Emotion labour

-Emotion work is commoditized.

-Managing emotions as part of your job, for pay.

• Especially required in occupations such as teacher, sales clerk, nurse, and flight attendant.​

• Growing service industry​

• Growing market for emotion labour

Common Sense vs. Sociological Reality:

• Common belief: Emotions cause actions (e.g., anger → yelling).

• Sociological view: Emotions are structured, regulated, and influenced by social context (statuses, roles, norms).

• Emotional behaviour is predictable and patterned, not random.

metaphor of social cement

• Just as cement holds bricks together, something must hold norms, roles, and statuses together.

• This leads to the central sociological question:
  → How is social interaction maintained?

Charles Derber’s analysis of conversations:

• Influenced by conflict theory​

• Social interaction involves competition over valued resources.​

• The odds of a relationship enduring goes up if there are payoffs for the interacting parties.

  Example of Conversational Attention Shift:

  1. John: “I’m feeling really starved.” → Focus on John.

  2. Mary: “Oh, I just ate.” → Shifts focus to Mary.

  3. John: “Well, I’m feeling really starved.” → Reasserts attention on himself.

  4. Mary: “When was the last time you ate?” → Accepts focus on John.

  • Outcome: John “wins” the brief attention competition.

Symbolic Interaction Theory and ​
Social Interaction

People socially interact based on learned norms.​

• Fairness​: Act fairly, even when it's not in their self-interest

• Altruism​: Engage in altruistic or heroic acts despite high personal costs

Learning of norms:​

• Ability to “take the role of the other” (MEAD)​

  -People learn how to act by imagining how others see them.

  -They adjust their behaviour to meet others’ expectations.

  -This process of interpretation and adjustment is called symbolic interaction.

• Active and creative process

  -Learning norms, roles, and statuses isn’t like reading a manual.

  -It involves negotiation, modification, and adaptation.

  -People don’t just accept social rules—they reshape them during interactions.

Goffman’s Dramaturgical Analysis

Views social interaction as a sort of play in which people present themselves so that they appear in the best possible light. ​

• Front Stage performances​

• Back Stage interactions ​

• can also be performances​

“There is no single self, just the ensemble of roles we play in various social contexts.”

Role Distancing

• Acting out a role without fully embracing it; showing minimal commitment.

• Purpose: To avoid embarrassment or to separate the role from one’s true identity.

• Examples:

  • “My parents force me to sing in the church choir.”

  • “I’m just working here temporarily.”

  • “This old car isn’t really mine.”

Impression Management

• Deliberate efforts to present oneself in a way that creates a desired impression.

• Example: Medical students at McMaster University:

  • Quickly adopt new vocabulary and white lab coats to appear professional.

  • Mimic doctors to fit into their new role.

  • Use medical jargon to hide ignorance and maintain authority.

  • Ask questions they already know the answers to—not to learn, but to impress teachers.

The Social Context of Language

Language has a social and cultural context.​

• The same words can mean different things in different settings. ​

• (or even opposite Right?)

Nonverbal communication:

• Facial expressions​

• Gestures and body language​

• Manipulation of space​

  -Intimate zone: 0–0.5 m (close physical contact).

  -Personal zone: 0.5–1.5 m (friends, acquaintances).

  -Social zone: 1.5–3.5 m (casual/business interactions).

  -Public zone: 3.5+ m (speeches, performances).

Status cues

• Visual indicators of a person’s social position.

Stereotypes

• Rigid views of how members of various groups act, regardless of whether the individual group members really behave that way.​

• Create social barriers that impair interaction or prevent it altogether.

How Social Groups Shape Our Actions: Sociologists emphasize three factors:

1. Norms of solidarity demand conformity.​

-We develop shared ideas about how we should behave toward others to sustain the relationships.​ Sociological concepts (like group influence, conformity, authority, moral disengagement, and institutionalized racism) are crucial to understanding how social groups can normalize atrocities.Even educated, “civilized” people can be led to commit or support horrific actions under certain social, political, and institutional pressures.

• Nazis in Germany​

• Employees NOT whistle-blowing​

• Gang members

  2. Structures of authority tend to render people obedient.

• experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram. Participants were told to give electric shocks to a man (an actor) for wrong answers.

• Even as the man cried out in pain, 71% of participants continued to 285 volts or higher.

  3. Bureaucracies are highly effective structures ​
     of authority:​

  • Large, impersonal organizations composed ​of many clearly defined positions arranged ​
    in a hierarchy.

Milgram’s Experiment and Obedience to Authority

• Shows that ordinary people will obey authority even when their actions cause visible harm.

• Milgram’s experiment supports that separating people from the negative effects of their actions increases the likelihood of compliance. Milgram’s experiment suggests that when people are introduced to a structure of

• The study showed that ordinary people tend to obey authority figures, even under distressing circumstances.

• Key findings:

  • Participants obeyed even when they believed they were harming someone.

  • The structure of authority was new, artificial, and participants could leave without penalty, but most still complied.

• Implication: Obedience is deeply ingrained, and people may act against their morals simply because they’re following orders.

  Broader Context: Nazi Germany

  • Helps explain how ordinary German citizens participated in or tolerated atrocities during WWII.

  • Suggests actions were driven less by deep-seated hatred and more by social pressure and obedience to authority.

Nazi Germany as a bureaucracy

• The goal: efficiently exterminate Jews and other “undesirables”

• Tasks were divided into specialized roles:

  • E.g., checking train schedules, organizing guard entertainment, maintaining gas supplies, removing ashes

• Officials focused on their specific job, often detached from the killing itself

• This division of labour made the killing feel more routine and less personal, reducing moral resistance

Social network

A bounded set of units (individuals, organizations, countries) linked by the exchange of material or emotional resources (everything from money to friendship).

• Characteristics:

  • More interaction occurs within the network than with outsiders

  • Members often identify as part of the network

• Can be:

  • Formal (documented, like a work org chart)

  • Informal (based on social ties, like friends)

Social networks are not limited to individuals

• Nodes (units of analysis) can also be:

• Groups

• Organizations

• Countries

  Example: Researchers study everything from romantic relationships to international diplomacy

Networks vs. Organizations

• Organizations are visible, structured (e.g., Boy Scouts of Canada)

• Networks often lack formal names, offices, or boundaries

  • E.g., no formal "Asian Trading Bloc," yet trading relationships still exist

Networks operate “beneath the surface” but are still powerful and influential

Why Networks Matter

• Focusing only on visible groups or organizations can give an incomplete picture

• Network analysis reveals deeper patterns of connection and influence

  • Helps explain how people:

    • Find jobs

    • Form communities

    • Choose marriage partners

• Networks are key to understanding many social dynamics that are not obvious at first glance

three main sociological factors influencing whether someone marries within or outside their group:

1. Resources

• People tend to choose partners with similar values, tastes, and knowledge.

• Culturally assimilated minority group members are more likely to share mainstream cultural traits → more likely to intermarry.

• High-status, financially stable minority members are more attractive to majority group members → higher chance of intermarriage.

2. Third Parties

• Families, communities, and religious institutions often discourage out-group marriage to preserve group identity.

• Less assimilated, more tightly knit groups apply stronger pressure → less intermarriage.

• Sanctions can be emotional or social (e.g., ostracism, like Kumail Nanjiani’s mother not speaking to him).

3. Demography

• Group size and location matter:

  • Small or geographically dispersed groups = fewer in-group options → more intermarriage.

• Gender imbalance (e.g., due to war, incarceration) can increase out-group marriages.

• Social settings (schools, workplaces, bars):

  • If these are integrated, people are more likely to meet and marry across group lines.

How Social Networks Help People Find Jobs

• Social networks are important sources of information about jobs, opportunities, events, and ideas.

• Many people find employment not through ads or websites, but through other people.

Mark Granovetter’s Research (1973): The Strength of Weak Ties

• Strong ties = close friends and family.

• Weak ties = acquaintances, friends of friends, casual contacts.

Key Findings:

• Weak ties are more useful than strong ties for finding jobs.

• Why?

  • Strong ties usually share the same social circles → provide redundant information.

  • Weak ties are connected to different networks → offer new, diverse information.

  • People typically have more weak ties than strong ones → more potential job leads overall.

Social group

A group composed of one or more networks of people who identify with one another, routinely interact, and adhere to defined norms, roles, and statuses.

Social category

A group composed of people who share similar status but who do not routinely interact or identify with one another.

The Asch Experiment

• Purpose: To test how group pressure influences individual judgment.

• Setup:

  • 7 male participants in each session.

  • 1 real subject, 6 confederates (actors working for Asch).

  • Shown two cards:

    • Card 1: a single line.

    • Card 2: three lines of different lengths.

  • Task: Identify which line on Card 2 matches the length of the line on Card 1.

Experiment Procedure

• The correct answer was obvious—one line clearly matched.

• Confederates were instructed to give the wrong answer deliberately.

• The real subject was always asked after hearing the confederates' answers.

Results

• 75% of subjects conformed at least once by giving the wrong answer.

• Only 25% consistently gave correct answers, resisting group pressure.

• Many participants overruled their own perceptions to agree with the group.

Groupthink

Group pressure to conform despite individual misgivings …can lead to disaster as groupthink discourages outside opinions

Bystander Apathy

• Related to the idea of groupthink.​

• Occurs when people observe someone in an emergency but do not offer help because they feel no responsibility for the incident and justify their inaction by the fact that others are not responding to it.

• Group boundaries often appear unchangeable and natural, but they are socially constructed.

• Groups create boundaries to:

• Assert dominance

• Increase self-esteem

• Compete for resources (e.g., jobs)

• Boundary formation may change, as seen after the Nazi occupation of Amsterdam:

  • During the occupation: Just two groups—collaborators and resisters.

  • After liberation: Groups reverted to old political, religious, and class divisions

Reference Group

• A group of people against whom an individual evaluates their situation or conduct. ​

• People in a reference group function as “role models.”

Primary Group

• A social group in which norms, roles, and statuses are agreed upon but are not put into writing.​

• Social interaction creates strong emotional ties, extends over a long period, and involves a wide range of activities.​

• The most important primary group: ​

  -Family​

Secondary Group

• A social group that is larger and more impersonal than primary groups.​

• Social interaction:​

  -creates weaker emotional ties ​

  -extends over a shorter period of time​

  -involves a narrow range of activities

Formal Organization

• A secondary group designed to achieve specific and explicit objectives.

Bureaucracy

Bureaucracies – The most efficient type of secondary groups (Weber).

Contradiction: Commonly, people associate bureaucracy with inefficiency, such as clerks in cubicles and endless red tape.

Two main factors underlie bureaucratic inefficiency:​

1. Size​

2. Social structure

How to Reconcile Weber’s View with Bureaucratic Inefficiency

1. Comparison with Older Organizational Forms:

   • Weber saw bureaucracies as more efficient than older organizations that relied on:

     • Traditional practice (“We do it this way because we've always done it this way”).

     • Charismatic leadership (“We do it this way because the leader inspires us”).

   • Bureaucracies, with formal rules and regulations, tend to be more efficient than these older forms.

2. The Ideal vs. Reality of Bureaucracy:

   • Weber acknowledged that bureaucracies operate efficiently only in the ideal case.

   • In the real world, bureaucracies often face inefficiencies.

   • Instead of labeling bureaucracies as either efficient or inefficient, we should focus on what factors make them work well or poorly.

Factors Leading to Bureaucratic Inefficiency

• Size of the Bureaucracy:

  • The larger the bureaucracy, the harder it is for communication to flow smoothly.

  • Rivalries and coalitions can emerge, which may impede decision-making and efficiency.

• Social Structure of Bureaucracy:

  • Bureaucracies are organized in a hierarchical structure (e.g., head → divisions → departments).

  • Each unit reports to the unit directly above it, and communication often follows formal channels (e.g., divisions report only to the head).

  • The hierarchy can create bottlenecks in communication, especially as the bureaucracy grows in size.

Challenges in Bureaucratic Communication

• Difficulties with Multiple Levels:

  • More levels in a bureaucratic structure create communication challenges.

  • People don’t communicate directly but through department and division heads, causing delays or miscommunication.

  • Information loss, distortion, or blocking can occur as it moves up the hierarchy.

• Information Overload:

  • Top bureaucratic levels can be overwhelmed with too much information (a "paperwork blizzard").

  • This can make it hard for heads to see the real needs of the organization or its clients.

  • Leaders may only have a vague understanding of what is happening on the ground (Wilensky, 1967).

• Weak Communication Between Departments:

  • If direct communication lines between departments or divisions are weak or nonexistent, information may be distorted as it passes through intermediaries.

  • Information in Department A1 may help Department B1, but the relay process can result in miscommunication.

  • People with authority may lack the necessary information, and people with information may not have the authority to act on it.

Bureaucracies vs. Innovative Firms

• Bureaucracies and Innovation:

  • Large bureaucracies may struggle to compete against smaller, innovative firms in rapidly changing industries.

  • Larger firms often have many levels of authority, slowing down decision-making and adaptation.

• Network Structures in Innovative Firms:

  • Smaller firms often have more democratic organizational structures with fewer levels of authority.

  • These firms tend to use a network structure, which has direct lines of communication between units, promoting faster decision-making.

  • In a network structure (compared to a traditional bureaucracy), information flows freely between units, rather than just upward through a hierarchy.

Organizational Constraints and Freedom

Social collectivities:​

• Conformity in people​

• Obedience in people​

• Domination of people​

People:​

• Can leave the social collectivities​

• Can resist the constraints ​

• Can challenge by forming new social collectivities

Summary: Struggling Against Constraints and Social Collectivities

-Struggling Against Constraints:

• Knowledge (including sociological knowledge) can help individuals resist oppressive or harmful influences:

  • Milgram Experiment: In some replications of this experiment, subjects were able to refuse compliance with harmful demands because they knew about the dangers of blind obedience (e.g., referencing the Nazis or Milgram’s original study).

  • This suggests that awareness of social psychological phenomena or sociological concepts can empower people to resist the influence of social pressures and authority figures.

-Leaving the Oppressive Collectivity:

• Another option is for individuals to leave the oppressive social group or system.

• Once they leave, they can form new social collectivities that challenge the old one. For example:

  • Lobbies, unions, political parties, or social movements.

• People are not entirely constrained by existing social structures; they can create new ones that align with their values and goals.