Before proceeding to the study of the complex phenomena of social life, it is necessary to investigate protozoa social phenomenon. All other sciences do this: chemistry takes a chemical element as the simplest model of the phenomena it studies, physics takes atoms, elementary particles, biology takes a cell, astronomy takes a separate celestial body.

The initial category of a system of sociological knowledge can only be a category that is a model of the simplest social phenomenon, which logically and historically precedes the emergence of society, any social system.

Common sense suggests that the emergence of society is preceded by an individual. Society is made up of people. Maybe a separate person - an individual - is an atom, the "first brick" of building a social system? No, even for physiological reasons, an individual cannot be such. In the biblical history of the origin of mankind, which is very far from modern scientific ideas, two people of different sexes were required for the emergence of society - Adam and Eve.

So maybe the elementary unit of society is the family? Also no, due to the complexity public relations within the family and the diversity of its historical forms, the family cannot be the simplest social phenomenon. In addition, the family did not always exist in the history of mankind.

So the point is not in the number of people living in any territory, but in the nature of the ties between them?! If tens, hundreds, thousands of people do not meet each other, do not exchange goods, information, do not communicate with the help of signal fires, tom-toms, telegraph, Internet, in other words, do not interact, but live in solitude, like Robinson Crusoe on his island, they do not form a social system, do not constitute a society. In order for a social system to exist, at least two people are needed, connected with each other in various ways. social interactions. Such a case will the simplest social phenomenon and it can become the simplest form of society if these two people are of different sexes (see above the story of Adam and Eve, as well as signs of society according to Shils). It is possible to decompose the entire social life and all complex communities of people into the simplest cases of social interaction. Whatever social process we take: be it a lawsuit, communication between a teacher and a student, a joint work on harvesting or a battle between two armies - all these forms of social activity can be represented as special cases of the general phenomenon of interaction. Whether we take a family, a study group, a hippie commune, a trade union, a military unit, a state, all these communities are the result of diverse social interactions between people.

Social interaction was first considered as the simplest social phenomenon in symbolic interactionism in the works of J.G. Mida. As the initial category of sociological knowledge, "social interaction" was used in integral sociology by P.A. Sorokin. Such well-known Western sociologists as T. Parsons and J. Homans developed their theories of social interaction.

Modern sociology defines social interaction as a system of interdependent social actions associated with cyclic dependence, in which the action of one subject is both the cause and effect of the response actions of other subjects.

P.A. Sorokin identified the following elements of social interaction: subjects of interaction; mutual expectations of the subjects of interaction; purposeful activity of each of the parties; conductors of social interaction.

Subjects of interaction . It is not by chance that the participants in social interaction were named P.A. Sorokin abstractly - "subjects", i.e. actors: interaction can involve two people, one person and a group of people, two or more groups, communities, organizations. The number of participants in the interaction affects the nature of the relationship between people. Since the interaction process consists of a chain of interdependent actions of the parties, each participant constantly acts as both a subject and an object of social interaction, transferring or perceiving certain interests, needs, moral, legal and other norms and patterns of behavior.

Mutual expectations of the subjects of interaction . Choosing an object of social interaction, the subject expects a certain behavior (reaction). The further behavior of the subject and the form of his interaction with the chosen object depend on the adequacy of this reaction. If the mutual expectations of the participants in the interaction do not match, then it will be interrupted very soon or the connection will be limited to social contact - a short-term single interaction. If mutual expectations coincide, then each of the parties will be able to achieve its goals, and the chain of interactions can last as long as desired. It is important to emphasize that expectations are always mutual. Going to a meeting with a stranger, you expect from him behavior that is adequate to the goals and objectives of the meeting, as well as the moral and legal norms adopted in the social group (society) to which you belong. But your partner, going to this meeting, has the right to expect the same from you. Therefore, beforehand, a person always mentally plays the situation of the expected interaction, depending on the current situation. A person, having several statuses and reflecting, accordingly, various social roles, adapts the system of mutual expectations to them. Acting as an investigator, a person before interrogation builds the expected picture of interaction with the defendant. But the same investigator, preparing for a meeting with the same person, but already acquitted by the court or who has served time (the idea of ​​a criminal reformed after serving his sentence is the essence of many films about the police Soviet period: "The place of the meeting cannot be changed", "The investigation is conducted by experts", etc.), who already act as an ordinary citizen of the state, have the right to expect a completely different form and content from the meeting. The same applies to a person who first acts as a criminal, and later as a law-abiding citizen. As the relationship between the subjects deepens, their mutual expectations become more definite, stable and predictable.

Purposeful activity of each of the parties . The activity of both parties in the system of social interaction is always purposeful. If a person's thinking is not disturbed, it is always concrete and selective. About social interaction one can speak only when the activity of two isolated subjects is directed at each other. The social activity of a person remains unclaimed until its vector intersects with the purposeful activity of another individual. At the same time, not every human action is a social action.

For the first time this problem was raised in sociology by M. Weber. Under social action The German scientist understood the action of a person (regardless of whether it is of an external or internal nature, comes down to non-intervention or patient acceptance), which, according to the meaning assumed by the actor or actors, correlates with the action of other people or is oriented towards him. Main signs social action, which Weber noted in his definition, is, firstly, awareness, the purposeful-rational nature of the activity of the individual and, secondly, its orientation to the expected response actions of other individuals.

The first sign, according to M. Weber, was to distinguish social actions, on the one hand, from affects, impulsive acts of behavior based on an explosion of emotions, on the other hand - from "traditional" activities based on blind imitation of patterns of behavior adopted in a particular culture. For lawyers, the distinction between purposeful-rational and affective action is important because individual articles The Criminal Code takes into account the affective nature of the action in the qualification of certain criminal acts. The second feature is decisive in determining social character perfect action. M. Weber argued that it is impossible to call social actions the actions of people focused only on the satisfaction of personal needs. For example, the manufacture of tools, fishing, hunting are not in themselves social activities if they are aimed at satisfying individual needs. But the same activities carried out jointly with other people, requiring the coordinated behavior of many individuals, are examples social behavior. It should be noted that the number of participants does not play a role: the mass behavior of a large number of people, for example, the decision of the townspeople to turn on the light after dark, is not necessarily a social action - in this case, people act independently of each other, satisfying their own needs. At the same time, an act of individual behavior, for example, suicide, is a social act, since it is oriented towards the response of other people.

As a rule, in the analysis of social action, the following main elements are distinguished: the actor; need that generates activity; the purpose of the action; action method; another actor to whom the action is directed; the result of an action; the situation in which the action takes place. In addition, psychologists distinguish indicative, control and executive parts in any action.

Conductors of social interaction . Another necessary element of social interaction is conductor system or, in other words, the totality of material means by which social action is transmitted from one subject to another. Without conductors, social interaction is possible only when its participants communicate directly, "face to face". In all other cases, when they are separated in space or time, social ties without conductors, material mediators of interaction are impossible. For example, if you need to send an urgent message to a relative, work colleague, girlfriend who is in another city, you can use a variety of intermediary guides: telephone (not necessarily cellular), telegraph, e-mail, the Internet, simply express your thoughts on a piece of paper and send a letter by mail ... Finally, you can use the most ancient method - to send a messenger, giving him a message in words. There are other exotic from the point of view of a person of the XXI century. types of interaction - sea bottle or pigeon mail. If the material intermediary does not fulfill its function: telephone communication will not be established, the telegraph will not work due to a holiday, the Internet server will be disabled by a computer virus, the letter will simply be lost in the mail, and the "messenger" will get lost in an unfamiliar city, - the message will not be transmitted and the social interaction will not take place. For people separated in time, the significance of conductors is especially great. Thanks to paintings, books, architectural structures (buildings, monuments, etc.), complex technical structures (airplanes, cars, ships, factories, etc.), the author who created them can influence huge masses of people even after his death. For several millennia, one of the pyramids in Egypt has glorified the name of Pharaoh Cheops and the gigantic work of its nameless builders. We can still conduct a mental dialogue with Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Chekhov, thanks to the fact that their books are stored in libraries and reprinted.

P.A. Sorokin divided the conductors of social interaction into mechanical ones, for example, a bullet, an arrow fired at an enemy; motor - gestures, facial expressions; chemical - the smell of perfume with which a woman wants to attract admirers; sound - human speech, music, various sound signals, for example, the sound of an alarm clock); light-colored - writing, painting, various signs, for example, the emblems of the military branches of the military; electrical - all types of telecommunications.

Especially P.A. Sorokin singled out subject or symbolic vehicles - material objects that act as representatives of any other objects, properties or qualities and are used to store and transmit messages (information, knowledge). Thoughts, feelings, experiences with which symbolic conductors are "loaded" do not coincide with their form, "shell" and are understandable only to people who are initiated into the meaning of these symbols. Young people watching the meeting of veterans of the Great Patriotic War can sometimes not understand why gray-haired old people cry when they carry out the banner of their military unit. But for veterans, it symbolizes the battle path of the regiment, division, corps, victories and failures, the loss of comrades, the years lived together, which, of course, cannot but evoke strong emotions. Other examples of symbolic conductors are: National emblem; National anthem; money; bread and salt - a symbol of hospitality among the Eastern Slavs; signs of royal power - a scepter and orb; cross, crescent - symbols of Christianity and Islam, etc. An extremely important role in interpersonal and group communication is played by special systems of symbolic conductors - natural and artificial languages, from sign language to computer programming languages.

The classification of forms of social interaction is carried out on various grounds.

Depending on the number of participants: interaction of two people with each other (two comrades); interaction of one and many (lecturer and audience); interaction of many and many (cooperation of states, parties, etc.)

Depending on the similarity or difference in the qualities of the participants in the interaction: same or different sexes; one or different nationalities; similar or different in terms of wealth, etc.

Depending on the nature of the acts of interaction: one-sided or two-sided; solidary or antagonistic; organized or unorganized; template or non-template; intellectual, sensual or volitional.

Depending on duration: short-term or long-term; having short-term or long-term consequences.

Depending on the nature of the conductors: direct or indirect.

The above description of the elements of social interaction and the classification of its forms make it possible to take a "snapshot" of this phenomenon, to present it in a static state. An analysis of the dynamics of social interaction reveals its new qualities: repeated repetition of acts of interaction with the same composition of participants, under the same conditions, makes them more stable, and behavior actors- more predictable. With the growth of stability, interaction, figuratively speaking, more and more "crystallizes", thereby changing the nature of social ties between people. Depending on the frequency of repetitions and stability in sociology, the following are distinguished types of social interaction Keywords: social contacts, social relations, social institutions.

Under social contact in sociology, it is customary to understand the type of short-term, easily interrupted social interaction caused by the contact of people in the physical and social space.

Every day a person enters into a huge number of social contacts: on the street, in a kiosk, buying a newspaper, in the subway, buying a token or presenting a document to the duty officer, in a store, etc. Committing some types of crimes, for example, such forms of fraud in trade as giving a "doll" instead of money, replacing a quality product with a clothing "doll" or low-quality goods when transferred from a seller to a buyer, attackers directly take into account the peculiarities of social contact as a short-term interaction. The whole calculation is based on the fact that the fraudster and the victim will never meet again.

Social contacts can be divided on various grounds. The most clearly identified types of social contacts in S. Frolov. He structured them in the following order:

Spatial contacts that help the individual determine the direction of the intended contact and orient themselves in space and time. This is the initial and very significant moment of any social interaction. Without it, we would drown in a sea of ​​information. S. Frolov, in solidarity with the sociologists N. Obozov and Y. Shchepansky, distinguishes two types of spatial contacts:

1. Assumed Spatial Contact when a person's behavior changes due to the assumption of the presence of individuals in any place. Such contact is otherwise called indirect. For example, knowing that there are people who want to enter the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, the person responsible for this work advertises the next admission to the university in the media.

2) visual spatial contact, or "silent presence" contact, when an individual's behavior changes under the influence of visual observation of other people. In psychology, the term "public effect" is similarly used, reflecting a change in an individual's behavior under the influence of the passive presence of other people.

Contacts of interest emphasize the social selectivity of our choice. When "reconnaissance" in the social space, a person, as a rule, mentally goes over in his memory all the possible candidates that could help him achieve the desired result. Depending on the situation, the social quality required for contact, objects can differ dramatically. For example, when attacking you, you will look for a person with a large physical force or one in power. If you want to know the location of any object, you are unlikely to turn to a foreigner or a young child. Having decided to start a family, you will also look for a person who impresses you in terms of his social, physiological, psychological and intellectual data. Such contact can be one-sided and two-sided, full-time and part-time, lead to positive and negative results. Contacts of interest encourage a person to reveal his potentialities hidden in him for the time being. One of the main tasks in teaching any subject is the task of helping to identify and comprehensively develop the hidden abilities of each student. Sometimes the student himself does not suspect the presence of some of them, and only when he becomes interested, carried away by the subject, he begins to make contact with the teacher. The contact of interest may continue or may be interrupted depending on many factors and circumstances, such as the strength and importance for the individual of the actualized motive and, accordingly, the strength of interest; degree of reciprocity of interests; degree of awareness of one's interest; environment.

Contacts of interest reveal the best, deepest personality traits, as well as social groups, associations, institutions to which it belongs.

Exchange contacts. This is already a higher step in the desire of individuals for social interaction. Here, individuals begin to enter into short-term relationships, exchanging some, at first neutral, information, objects, paying attention to each other. The main thing that is emphasized in the analysis of this type of contacts is the absence in the actions of individuals of the goal to change behavior or other social significant characteristics each other, i.e. so far, the attention of individuals is focused not on the result of the connection, but on the process itself. Individuals act in relation to each other not as individuals, but as carriers of certain social qualities that coincide with the expected requirements of a partner. The individual comes into contact with one of many who have similar qualities. This choice is superficial, random character and may change at any time. J. Shchepansky gives a very revealing example of buying a newspaper. Initially, on the basis of a well-defined need, an individual develops a spatial vision of a newsstand, then a very specific interest arises related to the sale of the newspaper and the seller, after which the newspaper is exchanged for money. Contacts develop on the basis of one reason - the need to purchase a newspaper. The identity of the seller is of interest to the buyer only in connection with the need to exchange money for a newspaper. Social contacts, when repeated, can lead to the emergence of more complex types of social relationships that are directed not at the object, but at the person.

A more stable form of social interaction is "social relations" – sequences, "chains" of repetitive social interactions, correlated in their meaning with each other and characterized by stable norms and patterns of behavior. Above, we have already pointed out that the repeated repetition of acts of interaction with the same composition of participants, under the same conditions, changes the nature of social ties between people: the actions of the parties become more and more stereotyped, moments of chance disappear step by step from their behavior, unpredictability and on this basis is formed new, additional an element of interaction is stereotypes, stable patterns and standards of activity, norms of behavior. The communication of two lovers already a week later, a month after they met, takes on the character of social relations: favorite meeting places appear, a regular frequency of dates is established, special ritual greetings and farewells, favorite words appear that describe emotions, moods, the nature of relationships, the meaning of which is clear only to two initiates, etc.

It should be noted that in social relations, norms and stable patterns of behavior are not yet generally significant, they are closely related to the personal qualities of the subjects of interaction and the nature of the relationships that have developed between them. Replacing one of the participants in the interaction process, for example, a manager who conducts business negotiations on behalf of the company with its business partners, can affect the entire system of existing relationships, destroy them or drop them to the level of social contacts. The reason is that the established standards of behavior were based on "personal connections", mutual sympathies of specific people. The introduction of a new person into the interaction system, differing in style of communication from the previous participant, has destroyed the thin threads of mutual trust, and it is necessary to build relationships with him from scratch.

The next type and qualitatively new level of development of social interaction is a social institution.

Similar information.

Forms of social interactions

The concept of social ties, their types

Obviously, in order to satisfy his needs, a person must interact with other individuals, join social groups, and participate in joint activities.

The central idea of ​​the sociological realism of E. Durkheim, to which, in essence, all his scientific work was devoted, is the idea public solidarity- the question of what is the nature of those ties that unite, attract people to each other. The desire of any person to contact with other people is due to basic human needs. These include: sexual (reproduction); group self-defense; communication with their own kind; intellectual activity; sensory-emotional experiences. Without contacts, the satisfaction of these needs is impossible.

Throughout life, a person is connected with other people through social ties that manifest themselves in various forms and forms.

Social relationships between members of a society or social group are extremely diverse. In the process of communicating with other people, a person constantly selects from a large number of various connections exactly those that he considers necessary to strengthen and develop. In this regard, each individual goes through several stages in the development of social relations before reaching the state of social relations.

In addition, it is social ties that are the basis group-forming processes, the first step in the formation of social groups (Fig. 1).

Fig.1. Types of social connections

So, consider the main types of social connections:

Social contacts. Social contacts should be recognized as the simplest type of connections. These contacts are the most simple, elementary connections between separate individuals.

The first step in building social connections is spatial contacts. They reflect the orientation of people in social space, in which individuals imagine where other people are and how many there are. They may assume the presence of other people or see them. The very assumption of the presence of a certain number of other people can change the behavior of individuals in society. Note that in spatial contact, the individual cannot distinguish from total the people around him are no separate isolated objects. He evaluates the people around him as a whole.

Separation from the spatial environment of some special objects can occur only with the contact of interest. With such contact, the individual singles out from his social environment a certain individual or social group to which he pays his attention, which he can use to deepen social ties.

The last type of contacts are exchange contacts. In the course of such contacts, there is a short-term exchange of values ​​between individual individuals. J. Schepansky, describing exchange contacts, notes that they represent a specific type of social relationships in which individuals exchange values ​​without having the desire to change the behavior of other individuals. This means that in the course of such sporadic and short-term exchanges, the attention of the individual is concentrated on the object of exchange, and not on the other individual entering into the exchange. An example of such contact is the purchase of a newspaper, when the buyer, ignoring the seller, gives money and receives a newspaper.

Every time an individual begins to communicate with other people, he must necessarily go through all these three types of contacts in order to move on to more complex social connections.

A more complex type of social connection is social action. Its significance is due to the fact that it is the simplest unit, the simplest element of any kind of social activity of people. For the first time in sociology, the concept of "social action" was introduced and scientifically substantiated by Max Weber.

In the understanding of M. Weber, social action has at least two features: firstly, it must be rational, conscious, and secondly, it must necessarily be oriented towards the behavior of other people.

Social Actions - it is a certain system of actions, means and methods, using which an individual or a social group seeks to change the behavior, views or opinions of other individuals or groups.

Any social action is a system in which it is possible to single out the following items:

ü subject of action influencing individual or community of people;

ü action object, the individual or community on which the action is directed;

ü means (instruments of action) and methods of action, by means of which the necessary change is carried out;

ü action result- the response of the individual or community on which the action was directed.

Two following concepts should be distinguished: "behavior" and "action". If behavior is the body's response to internal or external stimuli (it can be reflex, unconscious or intentional, conscious), then action is only some types of behavior.

When performing social actions, each person experiences the actions of others. There is an exchange of actions or social interaction.

social interaction- this is a systematically stable performance of some actions that are aimed at the partner in order to cause a certain (expected) response from his side, which, in turn, causes a new reaction of the influencer.

P. Sorokin studied social interaction in the most detail. In his opinion, a single individual cannot be considered as an elementary "social cell" or the simplest social phenomenon.

In his work "Systems of Sociology", he noted: "... an individual as an individual - can in no way be considered a microcosm of the social macrocosm. It cannot, because only an individual can be obtained from an individual and it is impossible to obtain what is called "society", nor what is called "social phenomena" ... For the latter, not one, but many individuals, at least two, are required. However, in order for two or more individuals to be considered as an element of society, it is necessary that they interact with each other.

Sorokin calls the conditions for the emergence of any social interactions:

ü having two or more individuals that determine the behavior and experiences of each other;

ü doing something by them, influencing mutual experiences and actions;

ü presence of conductors transmitting these influences and the impact of individuals on each other (for example, speech signals or various material carriers).

Human social connections are a set of interactions consisting of actions and responses. A complex network of interactions is formed, covering a different number of individuals. In the process of these interactions, social relations can develop.

Social Relations - this is a system of normalized interactions between partners about something that binds them (subject, interest, etc.). Unlike social interaction, social relations are a stable system limited by certain norms(formal and informal).

Social relations are divided into unilateral and mutual. Unilateral social relations are characterized by the fact that their participants put different meanings into them. For example, love on the part of an individual may stumble upon contempt or hatred on the part of the object of his love.

The reason that sometimes similar interactions differ from each other in content is values. Value in this context can be defined as a desired desired event. The content and meaning of social relations depends on how the need for values ​​and possession of them are combined in interactions. If one individual has resources in the form of wealth, and the other is not interested in acquiring them, then in this case only one type of relationship is possible - the independence of each of the individuals, disinterest and indifference.

For example, the case when Alexander the Great, who had power, wealth and prestige, offered to use these values ​​to the philosopher Diogenes of Sinop. The king asked the philosopher to name a desire, to present any requirement that he would immediately fulfill. But Diogenes had no need for the values ​​offered and expressed his only desire: that the king would move away and not block the sun. The relationship of respect and gratitude, which Macedonsky counted on, did not arise, Diogenes remained independent, as, indeed, the king.

The following elements can be distinguished in the system of relations:

ü subjects of communication- two individuals, two social groups, or an individual and a social group;

ü their link, which may be some object, interest, common value, creating the basis of the relationship;

ü a certain system of duties and obligations or established functions that must be performed by partners in relation to each other.

Among the variety of social relations, there are those that are present in all other relations and are their basis. These are, first of all, relations of social dependence and power.

For example, if we consider the relationship of love, it is obvious that the love of two people for each other implies mutual obligations and the dependence of one person on the motives and actions of the other. The same can be said about friendship, respect, management and leadership, where the relationship of dependence and power is most obvious.

Forms of social interactions

Social interactions in society can be viewed from the point of view of ways to achieve desired values. Here we are dealing with such categories as cooperation, competition and conflict. The first two concepts were developed in detail by American sociologists Robert Park and Ernst Burges.

Word cooperation comes from two Latin words: co"- "together" and " operari"- work. Cooperation can take place in dyads (groups of two individuals), small groups, as well as in large groups (in organizations, social stratum or society).

Cooperation is primarily associated with the desire of people to cooperate, and many sociologists consider this phenomenon based on selflessness (social altruism). However, studies and just experience show that selfish goals serve the cooperation of people to a greater extent than their likes and dislikes, desires or unwillingnesses. Thus, the main meaning of cooperation is, as a rule, in mutual benefit.

Competition(from lat. concurrere- run together) is a struggle between individuals, groups or societies for the acquisition of values, the reserves of which are limited and unequally distributed among individuals or groups (this can be money, power, status, love, appreciation and other values). It can be defined as an attempt to achieve rewards by sidelining or outperforming rivals seeking identical goals.

Competition can be personal (for example, when two leaders compete for influence in an organization) or be impersonal (an entrepreneur competes for markets without knowing his competitors personally).

Experiments conducted in groups show that if the situation develops in such a way that individuals or groups cooperate to pursue common goals, then friendly relations and attitudes are maintained. But as soon as the conditions are created under which there are unshared values ​​that give rise to competition, unfriendly attitudes and unflattering stereotypes immediately arise.

Conflict. Conflict analysis (from lat. conflictus- clash) it is useful to start from an elementary, simplest level, from the origins of conflict relations. Traditionally, it starts with needs structures, a set of which is specific to each individual and social group. All these needs Abraham Maslow(1908 - 1970) divides into five main types: 1) physical needs(food, sex, material well-being, etc.); 2) security needs; 3) social needs(needs for communication, social contacts, interaction); four) needs to achieve prestige, knowledge, respect, a certain level of competence; 5) higher needs for self-expression, self-affirmation(for example, the need for creativity).

All desires, aspirations of individuals and social groups can be attributed to any type of these needs. Consciously or unconsciously, individuals dream of achieving their goal in accordance with their needs. Consequently, all social interactions of a person can be simplified as a series of elementary acts, each of which begins with an imbalance in connection with an emerging need and the appearance of a goal significant for the individual, and ends with the restoration of balance and the achievement of the goal.

The Sociology of Conflict was developed by Randall Collins as a general theory. Unlike K. Marx and R. Dahrendorf, who focused on the macro theory of conflict, Collins focused on everyday interactions. From his point of view, conflict is the only central process of social life. Collins extended his analysis of stratification (as a phenomenon that generates conflict) to relationships between sexes and age groups.

He took the position that the family is an arena of gender conflict, in which men come out victorious, and women are oppressed by men and subjected to various types of unfair treatment. Collins turned to considering the resources that different age groups have.

Thus, the older generation has a variety of resources, including experience, influence, power and the ability to meet the physical needs of the young. In contrast, one of the few resources of youth is physical attractiveness. This means that adults tend to dominate the young. However, as a person grows older, he acquires more resources and is more able to resist, resulting in increased generational conflict.

From the point of view of conflict, Collins considered and formal organizations. He saw them as networks of interpersonal influences and arenas of conflicting interests.

Introduction 3

Essence of social interaction 5

Conditions for the emergence of social interaction 14

George Houmans: Interaction as exchange. twenty

Erwin Goffman: Impression Management 30

Conclusion 32

Glossary 34

References 35

Introduction

Due to its special importance for sociological theory the problems of social interaction deserve special close study. In this paper, we will attempt to address a number of different aspects of these problems. First of all, we will turn to what is the essence of social interaction; let us see how various sociological theories interpret the mechanisms of this process.

In addition, we will pay attention to how, in the course of social interaction, people become people, more precisely, full members of their society, as well as the processes of formation of principles, rules and norms, in accordance with which interaction processes are carried out in various areas of social practice. Particular attention should be paid to the causes and mechanisms of those cases of social interaction in which the behavior of participants deviates from the generally accepted rules and norms, and to determine what are the levers of social influence to return this behavior to the required track.

Sociological science has shown interest in this problem since its inception. Even O. Comte, analyzing the nature of social connection in his "social statics", came to the conclusion that only such a unit where social interaction is already present can act as a basic element of a social structure; Therefore, he declared the family to be the elementary unit of society.

M. Weber introduced into scientific circulation the concept of "social action" as the simplest unit of social activity. By this concept, he denoted such an action of an individual, which is not only aimed at resolving one's life problems and contradictions, but also consciously focused on the response behavior of other people, on their reaction.

The core idea of ​​the sociological realism of E. Durkheim, to which, in essence, all his work was devoted, is the idea of ​​social solidarity - the question of what is the nature of those ties that unite, attract people to each other.

In one of the most notable works in sociology is a small but very significant article by F. Engels "The role of labor in the process of transformation of a monkey into a man." Here the motif of meaning in anthropogenesis is repeatedly emphasized not just labor, but the joint labor of people. It is this that owes its origin to the second signal system, which raised man above the rest of the animal world of the planet: “the development of labor, of necessity, contributed to a closer cohesion of society, since thanks to it cases of mutual support, joint activity became more frequent, and the consciousness of the benefits of this joint activity became clearer. activity for each individual member. In short, developing people came to the point that they had a need to say something to each other. The need created its own organ: the undeveloped larynx of the monkey was slowly but steadily transformed by modulation for more and more developed modulation, and the organs of the mouth gradually learned to pronounce one articulate sound after another.

Relevance of the research topic. Modern civilization is in a state of global transformation affecting the fundamental foundations of social life. These processes are inextricably linked with the development of information and communication technologies, which radically change people's behavior, their psychology and lifestyle.

At the same time, not only the economic and political foundations of society are changing, but also the very ideas about what we used to call society.

At present, computer science, social informatics, network theory, cybernetics, informology, socionics, social synergetics, various theories of the information society and social information interaction are studying the problems of the informational nature of the social from different angles.

Despite the fact that social interaction is a fundamental system-forming concept for explaining social reality, it remains practically undeveloped, with the exception of some sociological theories of interaction that focus on the psychological origins, mechanisms, or procedural features of social interaction. However, the concept of social interaction, which gives its strict, structured definition, reveals its mechanisms, nature, types and forms, simply does not exist. At the same time, it is quite obvious that the category of social interaction should not simply describe the very fact of social relations and interdependencies, but reveal the internal mechanisms of social relations, determine their carrier, their patterns and constants, explain the cause-and-effect relationships of elementary social actions and the social relations generated by them. In addition, ideally, the concept of social interaction should be universal and uniformly describe various types and forms of interaction at all levels of organization of social systems: personal-psychological, interpersonal, group, social and societal.

Object of study is social interaction in sociological theories.

The essence of social interaction

Even ancient philosophers expressed the idea that it is impossible to live in a society and be independent of it. To meet their many and varied needs, a person is forced to interact with other people and social communities who are carriers of certain knowledge and values, is forced to participate in joint activities that implement various social relations (production, consumption, distribution, exchange, and others). Throughout his life, he is connected with other people directly or indirectly, influencing them and being the object of social influences.

Social interaction is a generalized concept, central to a number of sociological theories.

This concept is based on the notion that a social actor, individual or society is always in the physical or mental environment of other social actors and behaves in accordance with this social situation.

As you know, the structural features of any complex system, whatever the nature of its origin, depend not only on what elements are included in its composition, but also on how they are interconnected, connected, what effect they have on each other. friend. In essence, it is the nature of the connection between the elements that determines both the integrity of the system and the emergence of emergent properties, which is its most characteristic property as a whole. This is true for any systems - both for fairly simple, elementary, and for the most complex systems known to us - social ones.

The very concept of "emergent properties" was formulated by T. Parsons (1937) in his analysis of social systems. In doing so, he had in mind three interconnected conditions. First, social systems have a structure that arises not by itself, but precisely from the processes of social interaction. Secondly, these emergent properties cannot be reduced (reduced) to a simple sum of biological or psychological characteristics of social actors: for example, the characteristics of a particular culture cannot be explained by correlating it with the biological qualities of people who are carriers of this culture. Thirdly, the meaning of any social action cannot be understood in isolation from the social context of the social system within which it is manifested.

Perhaps Pitirim Sorokin considers the problems of social interaction most scrupulously and in detail. Let's try, following the classic of Russian and American sociology, to understand the elementary concepts of this most important social process, linking many disparate people into a single whole - society and, moreover, turning purely biological individuals into people - that is, into rational, thinking and, most importantly, social creatures.

Just like Comte in his time, Sorokin is firmly convinced that a single individual cannot be considered as an elementary "social cell" or the simplest social phenomenon: "... an individual as an individual cannot in any way be considered a microcosm of the social macrocosm. It cannot, because only an individual can be obtained from an individual and neither what is called "society" nor what is called "social phenomena" can be obtained ... For the latter, not one, but many individuals are required, at least two".

However, in order for two or more individuals to constitute something of a single whole that could be considered as a society (or its element), their presence alone is not enough. It is also necessary that they interact with each other, i.e. exchanged some actions and responses to these actions. What is interaction from the point of view of a sociologist? The definition that Sorokin gives to this concept is quite extensive and claims to embrace the almost immense, that is, all possible options: "The phenomenon of human interaction is given when:

a) mental experiences or

b) external acts, or

c) or both of one (some) people represent a function of the existence and state (mental and physical) of another or other individuals.

This definition, perhaps, is truly universal, because it includes both cases of direct, direct contacts between people and variants of indirect interaction. It is not difficult to be convinced of this by considering a wide variety of examples that occur in the daily life of each of us.

If someone (accidentally or intentionally) stepped on your foot in a crowded bus (external act), and this caused you indignation (psychic experience) and an indignant exclamation (external act), then this means that an interaction has occurred between you.

And if you are a sincere admirer of Michael Jackson's work, then each appearance of him on the TV screen in the next clip (and the recording of this clip probably required the singer to perform many external acts and experience many mental experiences) will cause you a storm of emotions (psychic experiences) , or maybe you jump up from the couch and start singing along and "dancing" (thus performing external acts). At the same time, we are no longer dealing with direct, but with indirect interaction: Michael Jackson, of course, cannot observe your reaction to the recording of his song and dance, but there is hardly any doubt that he was counting on such a response from millions of his fans, planning and carrying out their physical actions (external acts). So here we are also dealing with interaction.

Tax department officials developing a new fiscal project, State Duma deputies discussing this project, amending it, and then voting for the adoption of the relevant law, the President signing a decree on the introduction of a new law into force, many entrepreneurs and consumers whose income will be influence of this law - all of them are in a complex intertwined process of interaction with each other, and most importantly - with us. There is no doubt that here there is a very serious influence of both external acts and the mental experiences of some people on the mental experiences and external acts of other people, although in most cases they can see each other, at best, on the TV screen.

It is important to note this point. Interaction always causes some physical changes in our biological organism. We can feel the handshake; cheeks "flash" when looking at a loved one (vessels under the skin expand and experience a rush of blood); an experienced fighter, when a dangerous enemy approaches him, can maintain a "stone" expression on his face, but adrenaline is already injected into his blood, preparing his muscles for a lightning attack; listening to an audio recording of your favorite popular singer, you experience emotional arousal, etc.

Sometimes social interactions can take the form of conflict. Conflict interaction is always characterized by the confrontation of the parties in their desire to achieve the same (same for both parties) goal - to possess the subject of the conflict, which cannot be divided between the participants.

In foreign social psychology, there are several theories that explain the processes of social interaction. This is the theory of exchange by J. Houmans, and the symbolic interactionism of J. Mead and G. Bloomer, and the theory of control of impressions by E. Hoffman. The first singles out the desire to balance rewards and costs as a goal and incentive for interaction. Moreover, the more one and less the other, the more often a person will strive to repeat this action. However, the saturation of the need will lead to a decrease in the social activity of the subject. Howmans, thus, relies on Skinner's ideas, applying them to the analysis of the processes of social interaction.

The authors of the theory of symbolic interactionism pay attention to the fact that each person adapts his behavior to the actions of another (other) individuals. Therefore, not only actions, but also the intentions of the people around us can influence, influence us. Understanding (interpretation) of intentions and actions is carried out on the basis of the use of similar symbols acquired by a person in the course of socialization. From the point of view of G. Bloomer, interaction is not an exchange of actions, but a continuous dialogue, since interaction occurs when the action has not yet been completed, but the intentions of the subject are already realized, interpreted by the person and caused him the corresponding states, aspirations and responses. This theory complements the behavioral approach with a cognitive approach, taking into account the processes that occur in the minds of interacting individuals.

In situations of social interaction, people use primary and secondary or conditioned stimuli as a means of socially influencing each other to positively reinforce desired behaviors and negative reinforcement to eliminate unwanted ones. They also resort to the use of aversive stimuli, although in this case the result may be quite far from the desired one. The social environment and social influences, acting as direct determinants, however, cannot guarantee the obligatory appearance of the desired behavior or its change in the right direction. In the interaction of the subject and the social environment, a certain factor intervenes that determines its result. It can be conditionally called the predisposition of the subject to change his behavior in a direction desirable for another person.

This factor cannot be a purely personal formation, since the individual does not always act out of inner motivation, his behavior is largely determined by the social influences of the environment, although he can always foresee and know what others want and expect from him. It arises only in the course of subject-subject interaction and, to a certain extent, is its reflection. We call it the shaping environment. By this term, we denote the process and result of the mutual influence of personal dispositions, mutual expectations, activity attitudes of participants in communication or joint group activity, leading to a change in the personality structures of one, a certain number or all participants (for example, a change in qualities, motives, attitudes, value orientations, goals and meanings of activity) and their development. These structural changes within a given situation are expressed in such changes in behavior that persist even after the termination of the interaction or exchange of social influences. In other words, the forming environment is a psychological phenomenon of mutual influence of activity attitudes, mutual expectations and personal dispositions of interacting subjects in the conditions of solving problems of joint activity or interpersonal interaction.

Due to the presence of installation and dispositional components in the structure of the forming environment, it regulates the actual behavior of a person in society, the processes of his communication and interaction with other people, determines his development, socialization, education and self-education. This happens spontaneously, unintentionally, largely outside the consciousness of the individual.

The process of actualizing the various needs of a person makes him go into contact with other people or the social environment. At the same time, this or that task of activity, interaction, during which people mutually or unilaterally influence each other, is solved. The exchange of social influences in solving individual, group, activity or other tasks takes place in specific social conditions that can facilitate or hinder their implementation, contribute to or hinder the satisfaction of people of their needs. The subjects with which a person comes into contact, tasks and conditions are combined by the term interaction situation. Last term is increasingly used in the psychological literature to replace the term social environment. Therefore, they talk about the interaction of a person with the situation, and not with the environment, albeit a social one.

Situations, like the formative environment, do not exist by themselves, before the interaction begins. They appear, develop only in the course of it, and, in this sense, are able to act as determinants of human behavior and social development.

Describing the interaction of the subject and the situation, one should point out a number of fundamental points.

The actual behavior of the subject is determined by his versatile interaction with the situation. It implies the exchange of social influences, mutual stimulation and mutual reflection at the level of feedback.

In the process of this interaction, the subject pursues its goals. But, since other individuals are also included in the situation of social interaction, they, having the property of activity, pursue their own goals, sometimes not coinciding and even contradicting the goals of the first.

Personal determinants of human behavior are motives, dispositions, attitudes, cognitive structures learned or appropriated by them in the course of socialization and education.

The situational determinants of behavior are those psychological meanings (meanings) that the situation has for the subject in accordance with his actual needs and social position in the group (society).

The connecting moment of the interaction of the subject and the situation is the forming environment, which simultaneously belongs to the individual and the social environment, and includes their mutual attitudes about the activity that unfolds in the real situation.

Intra-individual differences in human behavior in similar, identical situations are explained by the development of the individual, which leads not only to a change in personal dispositions, but also to a change in his attitude to the situation as a whole, that is, a change in its personal meaning.

Interindividual differences (differences between individual individuals), including different degrees of conformity of the participants in the interaction, are explained by differences in their social positions and attitudes, the degree of awareness (competence), assessments and personal dispositions.

The discrepancy, inconsistency of the components of the formative environment, for example, attitudes, mutual expectations, personal dispositions and meanings, leads to a conflict of interaction or situational maladjustment of participants.

Conflict is a more active and adequate form of response to emerging contradictions, and situational maladjustment is a relatively more passive form, since only one side is subject to changes in it, while in the first case both.

Expectations, as components of the formative environment, generate an instrumental (operant) type of people's behavior leading to their social learning, which is an integral part of the socialization process.

In the course of social interaction, not only the behavior of people changes, the components of the forming environment are subject to transformation. They become determinants of subsequent interaction.

However, not every change in the components of the formative environment leads to the development of the personality of the participants in social interaction. These can only be conformal restructurings of their behavior, which disappear after the pressure of the group on the individual ceases.

In order to stimulate the processes of development, education, self-development and self-education, the transformation of the formative environment must be of an intentional nature. (The criteria for the intentional transformation of the formative environment will be described below).

The formative environment is a situational formation, that is, it functions only within the framework of specific situations of social interaction. Upon completion of the interaction, its components again become the property of the participants' personalities and remain in a potential state until the next contact of the individual with other people.

Intra-individual differences of subjects, due to the continuity of the processes of their development, give rise to temporal (procedural) variability of the forming environment. At the same time, its structure, the content of the components, and the degree of their consistency change.

In the processes of social interaction, the formative environment performs a number of functions.

The first function is regulatory. The formative environment carries out the selection and structuring of social interactions. Due to this, some of them achieve the goal, others do not, and others are distorted. The forming environment is a kind of membrane that separates the subject and the situation, and at the same time unites them into a single whole, through the regulation of mutual influences.

The second function is determining (forming). It is understood by us as the possibility of introducing (determining) by the components of the formative environment, including the characteristics of the situation, such changes in the personality of the participants in social interaction that will entail the appearance of personality neoplasms, that is, will cause the development of individuals. At the same time, development can be both spontaneous and controlled by the individual himself or his social environment. In the latter case, we will talk about the educational influence of the formative environment.

The third function is corrective. The forming environment allows subjects to carry out conformal adjustment to the situation and at the same time provides the possibility of such changes in the situation that meet the requirements, requests, and attitudes of interacting individuals.

The fourth function is organizing. The forming environment includes the parameters of the situation, reflected by the consciousness of the individual, in the process of regulating the behavior of a person and at the same time makes him a participant in this situation, including in the process of social interaction with the environment. Therefore, we can talk about the organizing influence of the forming environment, both on the subject and on the situation, which leads to a mutual reflection of each other's parameters.

The introduction of the concept of a formative environment makes it possible to successfully explain a number of socio-psychological phenomena, for example, the phenomena of social maladjustment, the phenomena of leadership-listing, and others. Psychological diagnostics and taking into account its components contributes to increasing the efficiency of managing the processes of social interaction between individuals and groups of people, in particular, participants in the educational process. At the same time, the phenomenon of the forming environment is, according to the apt definition of H. Heckhausen, another “hypothetical construct” invented to explain psychological reality.

The introduction of this concept satisfies a number of fundamental explanatory principles. modern psychology, namely, the principle of determinism, historicism, consistency and activity mediation. The concept of the forming environment corresponds to the principle of determinism, since it determines the cause-and-effect relationships of the process of interaction between the individual and the environment. It does not contradict the principle of historicism or development, which requires the study of any phenomenon from the point of view of its origin and consideration of its direction from the past to the future through the current actual state.

The concept of a formative environment in a filmed form captures the results of previous socialization, success - not success, efficiency - inefficiency of previous forms and types of social interaction. An analysis of its structure makes it possible to build a reasonable forecast of the further behavior of the subject and his partners in social interaction, joint activities. The principle of consistency requires an explanation of any phenomenon by the relationships it enters into, interacting with other phenomena, which are considered as elements (components) of an integral system. The introduction of the concept of the forming environment makes it possible to analyze the relationship between the individual and the situation through the relationship of similarity-opposite, unity-contradiction of their qualities and components and their inclusion in the wider context of the social life of the group, society as a whole.

Finally, the principle of activity mediation states that human consciousness is not only manifested, but also formed in activity. It has already been noted above that the formative environment arises only in conditions of social contact, interaction, joint activity and communication. Thus, another individual, individuals or groups can influence the development of a person's consciousness, the degree of his socialization. On the other hand, expectations, value orientations, personal meanings and dispositions belong to the personality and consciousness of the individual, or rather each of the interacting persons. They are manifested in their behavior to the extent that the situation of interaction allows it.

Conditions for the emergence of social interaction

P. Sorokin introduces and analyzes in detail three such conditions (or, as he calls them, "elements"):

1. the presence of two or more individuals that determine the behavior and experiences of each other;

2. the commission by them of some actions that affect mutual experiences and actions;

3. the presence of conductors that transmit these influences and the effects of individuals on each other.

We can add here a fourth condition, which Sorokin does not mention:

4. the presence of a common basis for contacts, contact.

Now let's try to take a closer look at each of them.

1. It is clear that in an empty space (or in a space filled only with plants and animals) no social interaction can occur. It can hardly occur where there is only one human individual. Robinson's relationship with his parrot and goat cannot be recognized as patterns (samples) of social interaction. At the same time, the mere fact of the presence of two or more individuals is still not enough for interaction to arise between them. These individuals must have the ability and desire to influence each other and respond to such influence. Among the ten basic needs of homo sapiens, which P. Sorokin singles out in his classification, at least five are closely related to the desire of any person for contacts with other people, and it is simply impossible to satisfy them outside of such contacts.

True, it should be noted that most of these needs are by no means innate; they themselves arise in the course of interaction. However, the question of which of them - the needs or the process of interaction - is ultimately the cause and which is the consequence, has as much chance of being answered as the question of the primacy of the chicken or the egg.

2. As was stated in the definition given at the beginning of this section, interaction occurs only when at least one of the two individuals has an impact on the other, in other words, performs some deed, action, act aimed at the other. Indeed, it is possible (albeit with difficulty) to imagine an arbitrarily large number of people gathered in one territory within the immediate reach (visibility and audibility) of each other, but at the same time completely ignoring each other, occupied exclusively with themselves. and your inner feelings. And in this case, we can hardly say that there is an interaction between them.

3. We will not classify the most diverse types and kinds of acts in the same detail as P. Sorokin does. Let us pay closer attention to the following of the conditions for the emergence of interaction that he introduced - the presence of special conductors that transmit an irritating effect from some participants in the interaction to others. This condition is quite closely related to the fact that the information transmitted in the course of interaction is always imprinted on some kind of material carriers.

Strictly speaking, information cannot exist outside of material carriers. Even at the deepest and unconscious - genetic - level, information is recorded on material carriers - in DNA molecules. The elementary information that animals exchange with each other is also transmitted with the help of material carriers.

The loose tail of a male peacock is perceived by the female through the perception of light waves by the organs of vision. Alarm signals (warnings of potential danger) are transmitted and perceived by members of the pack (any - be it a rook or a wolf) using sound waves; the same applies to the calling trills of the male nightingale, perceived by the female with the help of air vibrations.

Ants communicate with each other, releasing portions of certain odorous substances with their glands: special bodies the sense of smell of insects perceive the molecules of a particular substance as a smell, deciphering the information contained in it. In a word, in all cases, information is transmitted and received using certain material carriers.

However, these natural material carriers are extremely short-lived, most of them exist only during the period of transmission and reception, after which they disappear forever. They need to be re-created each time.

Perhaps the most significant difference between human (and therefore social) interaction and communication between animals is the presence of the so-called second signaling system. This is a system of conditioned reflex connections, peculiar only to a person, that is formed under the influence of speech signals, i.e. not even the most direct stimulus - sound or light, but its symbolic verbal designation.

Of course, these combinations of sound or light waves are also transmitted using short-lived material carriers, however, unlike momentary, one-time information transmitted by animals, information expressed in symbols can be recorded (and subsequently, after an arbitrarily long period of time, reproduced, perceived, deciphered and used) on such material media that are stored for an indefinitely long time - on stone, wood, paper, film and magnetic tape, magnetic disk. They, unlike natural carriers that exist in nature in finished form, are produced by people, are artificial. Information is imprinted on them in a sign-symbolic form by changing certain physical parameters of the carriers themselves. This is precisely the fundamental basis for the emergence and development of social memory.

The second signal system itself, being the basis for the emergence of generalized abstract thinking, can develop only in the course of specifically social interaction.

One way or another, if there are no conductors acting as carriers of material information carriers, there can be no talk of any interaction. However, when the conductors are present, neither space nor time will be an obstacle to the implementation of interaction. You can call a friend in Los Angeles on the other end the globe(conductor - telephone cable) or write him a letter (conductor - paper and postal delivery) and thus interact with him. Moreover, you interact with the founder of sociology, Auguste Comte (who has been dead for a hundred and fifty years) by reading his books.

Look what a long chain of interactions runs between you, how many social actors are included in it (editors, typesetters, translators, publishers, booksellers, librarians) - they also act as conductors of this interaction. Thus, in the presence of conductors, "in fact, neither space nor time is an obstacle to the interaction of people."

We have already noted above that sociology, in contrast to such scientific disciplines as, for example, psychology or social psychology, studies not only the direct and immediate interaction that occurs in the course of direct contacts between individuals. The object of her research are all types of social interactions. You interact with a lot of people you know and don't know when you speak on the radio, send an article to a magazine or newspaper, or, being a high-level official, put your signature on a document that affects the lives of a fairly large number of citizens.

And in all these cases it is impossible to do without material carriers of information, as well as certain conductors that transmit this information.

4. Above, we considered it necessary to supplement the list of conditions for the emergence of social interaction proposed by P. Sorokin with one more thing - what we called the presence of a common basis for contacts between social actors. In the most general case, this means that any effective interaction can occur only when both parties speak the same language.

We are talking not only about a single linguistic base of communication, but also about the same understanding of the norms, rules, principles that guide the interaction partner. Otherwise, the interaction may either remain unfulfilled or lead to a result, sometimes directly opposite to that expected by both parties.

Finally, the most general approach to considering the essence of social interaction obviously requires classifying them, i.e. create a specific typology of interactions. As you know, the compilation of any typology is based on the choice of a certain criterion - a system-forming feature.

P. Sorokin identifies three main features that make it possible to develop three different typologies of social interactions, respectively. Let's take a brief look at them.

1. Depending on the quantity and quality of individuals participating in the interaction process. If we talk about quantity, then only three options for interactions can arise here:

a) occurring between two single individuals;

b) between a single individual and a group;

c) between two groups.

Each of these types has its own specifics and differs significantly in character from the others, as Sorokin points out, "even under the premise of qualitative homogeneity of individuals."

As for quality, first of all, he points out the need to take into account the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the interacting subjects. A great variety of criteria for homogeneity or heterogeneity can be singled out, it is hardly possible to take into account even any of their complete set.

Therefore, Sorokin gives a list of the most important, among which, in his opinion, belonging should be distinguished:

To: a) one family	To: a") different families
b) one State	b") to different states
c) one race	c") " races
d) " language group	d")" language groups
e) one gender	e") "to the floor
f) "age	f") "age
m) similar in profession, degree of wealth, religion, scope of rights and obligations, political party, scientific, artistic, literary tastes, etc.	m) different by profession, property status, religion, scope of rights, political party, etc.

"The similarity or difference of interacting individuals in one of these relations is of great importance for the nature of the interaction."

2) Depending on the nature of the acts (actions) performed by the interacting subjects. Here, too, it is impossible or extremely difficult to cover the full range of options; Sorokin himself lists some of them, the most important.

We will simply name these options, and the interested reader can read them in more detail in the original source.

Depending on doing and not doing (abstinence and patience).

The interaction is one-way and two-way.

The interaction is long and temporary.

The interaction is antagonistic and solidaristic.

Interaction is template and non-template.

Interaction conscious and unconscious.

The interaction is intellectual, sensory-emotional and volitional.

3) And, finally, a typology of interactions is compiled depending on the conductors.

Here Sorokin highlights:

a) forms of interaction depending on the nature of the conductors (sound, light-color, motor-mimic, subject-symbolic, through chemical reagents, mechanical, thermal, electrical);

b) direct and indirect interaction.

Note that if there were an urgent need to make a deeper analysis of some real systems of interaction, then this could be done in matrix form, superimposing various bases of classification on top of each other and describing any specific social interaction according to a group of attributes.

There are many theories of interpersonal interaction in sociology. In this chapter I will try to describe four theories. N. Smelser briefly summarizes these basic theories in a table.

	Theorist	Main idea
exchange theory	George Howmans	People interact with each other based on their experience, weighing possible rewards and costs.
Symbolic interactionism	George Herbert Mead, Herbert Bloomer	The behavior of people in relation to each other and to the objects of the surrounding world is determined by the value that they attach to them.
Experience Management	Erwin Hoffman	Social situations are like dramatic performances in which the actors strive to create and maintain favorable impressions.
Psychoanalytic theory	Sigmund Freud	Interpersonal interaction is deeply influenced by the concepts learned in early childhood, and the conflicts experienced during this period

George Houmans: Interaction as exchange.

Due to the fact that the concept of social interaction is central in sociology, a number of sociological theories have arisen that develop and interpret its various problems and aspects at two main levels of research - the micro level and the macro level. At the micro level, the processes of communication between individuals who are in direct and immediate contact are studied; such interaction occurs mainly within small groups. As for the macro level of social interaction, this is the interaction of large social groups and structures; here the interest of researchers covers, first of all, social institutions.

One of the most famous and thoroughly developed theories describing social interaction is considered to be exchange theory. In general, the very conceptualization of social interaction, social structure, and social order in terms of exchange of relations has a long history in anthropology, although it has only relatively recently been adopted by sociologists. The intellectual foundations of the idea of ​​exchange date back to classical political economy, whose founders Bentham, Smith and others believed that the main driving factor in the activity of any human being should be considered the desire for utility and gain. At the end of the past - the beginning of the present centuries, many works on social anthropology pointed out the important role of exchange transactions in the life of primitive tribes.

To the everyday question: "How are you doing?" or "How are you?", most people say, "Thank you, great," even if they have a little cold or something unhappy. This creates ease and convenience in communication. People feel free and understand each other. Each of us makes a certain effort to receive a reward in order to satisfy our need. Simply put, each of us strives to balance rewards and costs in order to make our interactions sustainable and enjoyable. Such exchange relationships are constantly taking place in human interactions, and this is the essence of the theory of Howmans. According to his theory, a person's behavior in the present moment is determined by whether the person's actions were rewarded in the past.

Here one can highlight four principles of theory:

The more often an act is rewarded, the more often it will be repeated. For example, if we play cards and win after that, we probably want to play again. If every game we play ends in failure, we will probably lose interest in this activity.

If the reward depends on some conditions, then the person seeks to recreate these conditions. For example, if we go fishing. Fishing is more successful in shady pools than in sun-drenched places, we will probably tend to fish in shady corners.

If the reward is high, the person is willing to put in more effort to get it. If the fisherman knows a place where the catch is rich, he will be ready to make his way through the brambles and even climb the rocks to reach this place.

When a person's needs are close to saturation, he is less willing to make efforts to satisfy them. For example, when playing cards, we win several times in a row, probably already in the tenth game we will be less passionate about the game than in the first. Howmans applies these principles to all types of human interaction, so even complex types of it can be analyzed: power relations, negotiation process, etc.

One of the initial premises on which the theory of exchange is based is the assumption that a certain rational principle is embedded in human social behavior, which encourages him to behave prudently and constantly strive to obtain a wide variety of "benefits" - goods, money, services, prestige, respect, approval, success, friendship, love, etc. In the early 1960s, the American sociologist George Homans came to the conclusion that concepts such as "status", "role", "conformism", "power", etc., which had become firmly established in sociology, should not be explained by the action of macrosocial structures, as in functionalism, but from the point of view of those social relations that give rise to them. The essence of these relations, according to Homans, is the desire of people to receive benefits and rewards, as well as in the exchange of these benefits and rewards.

Proceeding from this, Homans explores social interaction in terms of the exchange of actions between the "Actor" and the "Other", assuming that in such an interaction each of the parties will seek to extract the maximum benefit and minimize their costs. Among the most important of the expected rewards, he refers, in particular, to social approval. The mutual reward that arises in the course of the exchange of actions becomes repetitive and regular, and gradually develops into relationships between people based on mutual expectations. In such a situation, the violation of expectations on the part of one of the participants entails frustration and, as a result, the emergence of an aggressive reaction; at the same time, the very manifestation of aggressiveness becomes, to a certain extent, satisfaction.

These ideas were developed by another American sociologist, Peter Blau, who argued that practically "all human contacts are based on the equivalence scheme of giving and returning." Of course, these conclusions were borrowed from the ideas of the market economy, as well as behavioral psychology. In general, theories of exchange see a similarity between social interactions and economic or market transactions carried out in the hope that services rendered will somehow be returned.

Thus, the basic paradigm of the exchange theory is a dyadic (two-personal) model of interaction. We repeat that the emphasis is on mutual exchange, although the basis of interaction still remains calculated and plus this includes a certain amount of trust or mutually shared moral principles.

This approach almost inevitably faces a number of criticisms. The gist of these remarks is as follows.

The psychological premises of this approach are too simplistic and overemphasize the selfish, calculating elements of the individual.

Exchange theory is, in fact, limited in development, since it cannot move from a two-person level of interaction to social behavior on a larger scale: as soon as we move from a dyad to a wider set, the situation acquires considerable uncertainty and complexity.

It fails to explain many social processes, such as the dominance of generalized values, which cannot be extracted from the dyadic exchange paradigm.

Finally, some critics argue that exchange theory is simply "an elegant conceptualization of sociological triviality."

Given this, the followers of Homans (Blau, Emerson) tried to be more flexible in order to overcome the gap between the micro and macro levels that the exchange theory created. In particular, Peter Blau suggested conducting research on social interaction by synthesizing the principles of social exchange with the concepts of such macrosociological concepts as structural functionalism and conflict theory.

One of the modifications of the theory of exchange is that which arose in the 80s. rational choice theory. This is a relatively formal approach that argues that social life can in principle be explained as the result of "rational" choices. "In the face of several options actions, people usually do what they believe should, with a certain degree of probability, lead them to the best result in general. This deceptively simple sentence sums up rational choice theory.” Characteristic of this form of theorizing is the pursuit of technically rigorous models of social behavior that seek to draw clear conclusions from a relatively small number of initial theoretical assumptions about “rational behavior.”

Another influential theory that aims to provide an explanatory description of social interaction is symbolic interactionism. This theoretical and methodological direction focuses on the analysis of social interactions mainly in their symbolic content. The followers of this approach argue that any actions of people are manifestations of social behavior based on communication; communication becomes possible due to the fact that people attach the same meaning to a given symbol. At the same time, special attention is paid to the analysis of language as the main symbolic mediator of interaction. Interaction is thus seen as "a continuous dialogue between people in which they observe, comprehend each other's intentions and react to them." The very concept of symbolic interactionism was introduced back in 1937 by the American sociologist G. Bloomer, who summarized the basic principles of this approach from the standpoint of three assumptions:

a) human beings perform their actions in relation to certain objects on the basis of the values ​​that they attach to these objects;

b) these meanings arise from social interaction;

c) any social action results from the adaptation to each other of individual lines of behavior.

George Herbert Mead: Symbolic Interactionism.

One of the sociologists who is considered the founder of the concept of symbolic interactionism was George Herbert Mead. Mead was a professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago for most of his life, never considering himself anything but a philosopher, and indeed did some pretty sophisticated research on philosophy.

Nevertheless, his influence on American philosophy remained very superficial, but his influence on American sociology and social psychology was enormous. The work that most ensured his influence was not published until his death. It was a series of lectures compiled by his followers into a book which they entitled Mind, Self and Society. In this work, Mead analyzes in great detail how social processes create the human self (his awareness of himself and his special place in society), emphasizing that it is impossible to understand a person without understanding him in a social context. A key concept in Mead's social philosophy is the role, and Mead's work on this subject became the basis for what was later called "role theory" in American sociology. Mead's influence has remained very strong to this day, and he is generally regarded as one of the most influential figures in that school of sociology and social psychology that is today called symbolic interactionism.

Mead's argument was that the difference between man and any other kind of active being includes the following two differences.

All types of active beings, including man, are equipped with a brain, but only man has a mind.

All other species, including humans, have bodies, but only humans have a sense of their own unique and unique identity. In the first of these two distinctions, brains are certain psychological entities, organs composed of material substances, possessing certain properties, and represented by what in Mead's time was called the central nervous system. However, unlike those researchers of the brain who considered it as a purely biological substance, Mead wrote: "It is absurd to look at the mind only from the standpoint of the individual human organism." Therefore, "we must evaluate the mind ... as arising and developing within the framework of the social process." Human forms of cognition are characterized by a process in which the social mind endows the biological brain with the possibilities of knowing the surrounding world in very special forms: “The subjective experience of the individual must be put in certain relations with the natural sociobiological operations of the brain in order to make an acceptable assessment possible at all; and this can only be done if the social nature of reason is recognized. Thus, intelligence presupposes the presence of at least "two brains". The mind can fill the brain with information to the extent (and to the extent) to which the individual incorporates the points of view of other people into his actions.

However, the Meadian analysis is more than just an attempt at reflection by putting oneself in the place of another. The second of the differences noted above is the difference between the body and the personality. What allows the physical body to become a social person? Only the possibility of interaction with other social personalities. Since "personalities can only exist in certain relations with other personalities," qualities of reason can only exist in cases where the gesture "has the same effect on the individual who makes it and on the individual to whom it is addressed." Therefore, no individual can have a purely reflective intellect - that is, can not be considered to have a mind - without interacting with another individual who also has a mind. Moreover, this other must already be a person even before our personality can enter into communication with him. Thus, human cognition is different from any other type of cognition because it requires us to filter our thoughts through the way we think we can effectively bring them to the understanding of other human beings.

Social life depends on our ability to imagine ourselves in other social roles, and this acceptance of the role of the other depends on our ability to internally talk to ourselves. Mead envisioned society as an exchange of gestures that included the use of symbols.

Thus, symbolic interactionism is, in essence, the study of society's relationship to itself as a process of symbolic communications between social actors. This view has made an important contribution to the analysis of such sociological concepts as role, socialization, communication and action. He proved to be quite effective in developing a sociology of deviation for understanding careers, as well as in the study of criminal behavior.

The interactionist approach also provided a theoretical basis for other, later sociological concepts, in particular, labeling theories and social stereotypes. He, in particular, proved his value in medical sociology for the study of doctor-patient interaction and the role of the patient. While Mead emphasized his social objectivism (society has an objective existence of its own and does not simply reflect the subjective consciousness of its constituent actors), modern symbolic interactionism tends to view society as a system arising from many different deeds performed by social actors.

In fact, to some extent, almost all the objects, phenomena and actions of people around us carry a symbolic load. And, only having understood what exactly they symbolize for our interaction partner (real, potential or imaginary), we will be able to carry out this interaction. Almost any action that we perform is associated with understanding not only the actions, but also the possible intentions of the partner, the ability to "get into his shoes." Mead called this comprehension "taking on the role of the other." This means that, for example, a child not only learns to recognize a certain attitude in someone and understand its meaning, but that he learns to accept it for himself.

Play is a very important part of this learning process. Everyone, of course, watched children play their parents, older brothers and sisters, and later - war, cowboys, Indians. Such play is important not only for the specific roles it covers, but also for teaching the child any role. So it doesn't matter that this particular child never plays cowboys or Indians. But when playing a role, first of all, a generalized pattern of behavior is learned. "It's not about becoming an Indian, but rather about learning how to play roles."

Besides this general "role-playing" learning function, the same process can also convey social meanings "for reality". How Russian children will play the roles of policemen and crooks in their games will greatly depend on what this role means in their direct social experience. For a child from an intelligent wealthy family, a policeman is a figure full of authority, confidence, readiness to protect ordinary citizens, who can be turned to in case of trouble. For a marginalized child, the same role is likely to be one of hostility and danger, more of a threat than trust, someone to be run from rather than resorted to. We may also assume that in American children's games, the roles of Indians and cowboys will have different meanings in a white suburb or on an Indian reservation.

Thus, socialization proceeds in continuous interaction with others. But not all others with whom the child deals are equally important in this process. Some of them are clearly of "central" importance to him. For most children, these are parents, as well as, to one degree or another, brothers and sisters. In some cases, this group is supplemented by figures such as grandparents, close friends of parents, and playmates. There are other people who remain in the background and whose place in the process of socialization can best be described as background influence. These are all kinds of casual contacts - from the postman to a neighbor who is seen only occasionally.

If we consider socialization as a kind of dramatic performance, then it can be described from the point of view of ancient Greek theater, where some of the participants act as the main characters of the play (protagonists), while others function as a chorus.

Mead calls the main characters in the drama of socialization significant others. These are the people with whom the child interacts most frequently, with whom he has important emotional connections, and whose attitudes and roles are decisive in his position. Obviously, in what happens to the child, it is very important who these significant others are. By this we mean not only their idiosyncrasies and quirks, but also their location in the larger society. In the early phases of socialization, whatever attitudes and roles are assumed by the child, they are received precisely from significant others. They are in a very real sense social world child.

However, as socialization proceeds, the child begins to understand that these particular attitudes and roles correspond to a much more general reality. The child begins to realize, for example, that not only is his mother angry with him when he wets himself, but this anger is shared by every other significant adult he knows, and indeed by the adult world at large. It is at this moment that the child begins to relate not only to concrete significant others, but also to the generalized other (another concept of Mead), which represents society in its entirety. This stage is not difficult to see from the point of view of language. In the earlier phase, the child seems to be saying to himself (in many cases he really does): "Mom doesn't want me to piss."

After the discovery of the generalized other, it becomes something like this statement: "This cannot be done." Concrete attitudes now become universal. The specific commands and prohibitions of individual others become generalized norms. This stage is very decisive in the process of socialization.

According to some sociologists, symbolic interactionism gives a more realistic idea of ​​the mechanisms of social interaction than exchange theory. However, he focuses his attention on the subjective representations of interacting individuals, each of which, in essence, is unique and unrepeatable. Therefore, on its basis, it is rather difficult to make generalizations that could be applied to a wide variety of life situations.

Let us briefly mention two more influential sociological concepts of interaction. The first of these is ethnomethodology. This theoretical direction attempts to take on board the research methods that anthropologists and ethnographers use to study primitive cultures and communities, making them sociologically universal. The basic assumption here is that the rules that govern human contact are usually taken on faith, ready-made. Thus, ethnomethodology aims to investigate how people ("members") construct their world. Its subject is the hidden, unconscious mechanisms of social communication between people. At the same time, all forms of social communication are reduced to a large extent to verbal communication, to everyday conversations.

One of the ethnomethodological research methods is illustrated by the experiments of their founder Harold Garfinkel on the destruction of the stereotypes of everyday life. Garfinkel asked his students to behave as if they were lodgers when they got home. The reactions of parents and relatives were dramatic, at first bewildered, then even hostile. For Garfinkel, this illustrates how carefully, even delicately, the social order of everyday life is constructed.

In other studies (for example, the behavior of jurors), he studied how people construct their order in different situations completely taking it for granted. J. Turner formulated the program position of ethnomethodology as follows: "The features of the rationality of behavior must be revealed in the behavior itself."

The author of another concept of social interaction, Erwin Goffman called it impression management. The main interest of his research was connected with the elements of fleeting meetings, the possibilities inherent in momentary collisions, that is, with the sociology of everyday life. In order to study and understand the order of such meetings, Hoffmann used drama as an analogy for staging social meetings, which is why his concept is sometimes called the dramatic approach.

Its main idea is that in the process of interaction, people usually play a kind of "show" in front of each other, directing the impressions about themselves perceived by others. Social roles are thus analogous to theater roles.

Thus, people design their own images, usually in ways that best serve their own purposes. The regulation of interactions between people is based on the expression of symbolic meanings that are beneficial to them, and they often themselves create situations in which, as they believe, they can make the most favorable impression on others.

Erwin Goffman: Impression Management

Erwin Goffman assigns an important role to this type of impression management in social interaction. He believes that people themselves create situations to express symbolic meanings through which they make a good impression on others. This concept is called the dramatic approach.

Goffman views social situations as miniature dramas: people act like actors on a stage, using their surroundings as scenery to create certain experiences. For example, this is especially evident during election campaigns. The individual strives to provide sufficient agreement so that the interaction can continue. Or vice versa - to deceive, push away, confuse, mislead, insult other people or fight them.

Regardless of the specific goal that a person sets for himself, despite the motive that determines this goal, he is interested in regulating the behavior of others, especially their response. This regulation is carried out by its influence on the understanding of the situation by others, i.e. he acts in such a way as to make the impression he needs on other people. For example, important people are late for social events because, among other things, they are trying to create the impression of their importance, to inspire others that no event will take place without them.

Sigmund Freud: Psychoanalytic Theory

Sigmund Freud's theory of interpersonal communication is based on the belief that the process of interaction between people reflects their childhood experience. According to Freud's theory, in various life situations we apply concepts learned in early childhood. Freud believed that people form social groups and stay there because they feel a sense of devotion and obedience to the leaders of the groups. According to Freud, this is not due to some special quality of the leader, but rather because people identify them with powerful, god-like personalities, which their fathers personified in childhood. In such situations, the person regresses or returns to an earlier stage of development.

Regression occurs mainly in situations where the interaction is informal or unorganized. Thomas Cottle studied some of the groups that formed at Harvard University. They were made up of male and female students aged 18 to 22 and were led by graduate students or faculty members. These groups met at the appointed time, but they did not have a clear plan of action.

Cottle noted that the lack of specific expectations helped cement the power of group leaders. The laws of the jungle applied here. To some extent, these groups resembled families in primitive societies: their family members assumed the roles of "father", "mother" and "child"; "parents" had to "settle" the problems and conflicts that occurred in the life of "children". "Settlement" of the situation is sometimes required, for example, when a manager in an enterprise attacks a colleague just because she reminds him of an unloved sister, or when a student does poorly in some subject because she fails to charm the teacher.

Conclusion

Consideration of the problems of social interaction is a search for answers to a wide variety of questions: what are the typical ways in which people establish a wide variety of connections among themselves, how do they maintain these connections, what are the conditions for maintaining and maintaining (and, conversely, interrupting) these connections how these connections affect the preservation of the integrity of the social system, and how the nature of the social system affects the ways in which people interact ...

In short, there is no end to the questions that arise when considering the problem of social interaction.

We could refer to the works of any of the classics or modern theorists of sociological science, and it would not be difficult to see how much attention they pay to the problem of social interaction. At the same time, when the question of social connection arises, almost every time emphasis is placed on the mutual influence of the social objects under consideration on each other.

I have read many theories of interpersonal interaction in several sociology textbooks. After reading N. Smelser's book, I fully agreed with his view on theories. He described only four of the many theories of interpersonal interaction proposed by many scientists. In the course of my work, I mainly referred to the work of Smelser.

In the process of my research, I learned a lot of new and interesting things, I had to spend a lot of effort. Thus, as a result of my work, I came to the following conclusions:

1. The simplest model of a social phenomenon is the interaction of two individuals.

2. In any phenomenon of interaction there are four elements:

a) individuals,

b) their acts, actions,

c) conductors

d) a common basis for contact.

3. Sociologists study the process of interaction at two levels: micro - and macro level.

4. There are three typologies of interaction depending on the choice of system-forming features:

1) the number and quality of participants in the interaction;

2) the nature of the acts performed by the participants in the interaction;

3) the nature of the conductors of interaction.

5. A number of sociological concepts have been developed that describe and explain the mechanisms of social interaction. According to the exchange theory, a person's behavior in the present moment is determined by whether the person's actions were rewarded in the past. According to the concept of symbolic interactionism, social life depends on our ability to imagine ourselves in others. social roles and this acceptance of the role of the other depends on our ability to have an internal conversation with ourselves. The concept of impression management (dramatic interactionism) states that the regulation of interactions between people is based on the expression of symbolic meanings that are beneficial to them, and they often themselves create situations in which they believe they can make the most favorable impression on others. According to the theory of Sigmund Freud, in the process of interaction of people their childhood experience is reflected, people apply the concepts learned in early childhood.

Glossary

Social interaction is the process of influencing individuals, social groups or communities on each other in the course of realizing their interests.

Social interaction is “a way of implementing social ties and relationships in a system that implies the presence of at least two subjects, the process of interaction itself, as well as the conditions and factors for its implementation. In the course of interaction, the formation and development of the individual, the social system, and their change in the social structure of society take place.

Social interaction is a systematically stable performance of some actions that are aimed at a partner in order to cause a certain (expected) response from his side, which, in turn, causes a new reaction of the influencer.

Social action is an action of an individual, which is not only aimed at resolving one's life problems and contradictions, but also consciously oriented towards the response behavior of other people, their reaction.

Bibliography

Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. - M.: Vlados 2002.-236s.

Anurin V.F. Fundamentals of sociological knowledge: A course of lectures on general sociology. - N. Novgorod: NKI, 2004. - 358s.

Big encyclopedic dictionary. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional – M:
Great Russian Encyclopedia, 2000.- 470s.

Dmitriev A.V. General sociology: Proc. allowance. - M: Vlados 2001. - 312s.

Komarov M.S. Introduction to sociology. - M.: Enlightenment 2003. - 143 p.

Brief Dictionary of Sociology / Under the general. ed. D.M.Gvishiani, N.I.Lapina. - M .: Politizdat, 1990.- 199s.

Kravchenko A.I. Introduction to sociology. - M.: Logos 2005. - 268s.

Kravchenko A.I. Fundamentals of sociology.- M.: Logos, 2004.- 302p.

Merton R. Social theory and social structure // Sociological research. - No. 2, 2008 p.28

Radugin A.A. Sociology: a course of lectures. - M.: Center, 2001 - 106s.

Rismen D. Some types of character and society // Sociological research. No. 5, 2008 p.32

Rutkevich M.N. Society as a system: Social essays. M.: Nauka 2004.- 284 p.

Sociology: Tutorial/General ed. E.D. Tadevosyan. - M .: Knowledge, 2003 - 226s.

Sociology: Dictionary-reference book. Social structure and social processes. - M.: Knowledge 1999. - 402 p.

Smelser N.J. Sociology. - M.: Aspect-Press 2005.- 306s.

Sorokin P.A. system of sociology. - M.: Enlightenment 2002. - 220s.

Sociology / G.V.Osipov, Yu.P.Kovalenko, N.I.Shchipanov, R.G.Yanovsky.-M.: Thought, 2005.-335p.

Smelzer N. Sociology: Per. from English. – M.: Phoenix, 2004.- 300s.

Turner D. Structure of sociological theory. - M.: Phoenix 2004.- 270s

Bortsov Yu.S. Sociology. Tutorial. - Rostov-on-Don: publishing house "Phoenix", 2002. - 352 p.

Kozlova O.N. Sociology. - M.: Omega-L Publishing House, 2006. - 320 p.

Frolov S.S. Sociology: Textbook. - 3rd ed., add. - M.: Gardariki, 2001 - 344 p.

Ageev V.S. Intergroup interaction: socio-psychological problems. M. 1990.

Durkheim E. Sociology. Its subject, method, purpose. M., 1995.

Kapitonov E.A. Sociology of the twentieth century. History and technology. Rostov-on-Don, 1996.

Parsons T. The action coordinate system and the general theory of action systems: culture, personality and the place of social systems. Electronic version on the website of the library of the Department of Philosophy and Methodology of Science of the Kyiv National University. T. Shevchenko. http://www.philsci.univ.kiev.ua/biblio/par1.html

Smelzer N. Sociology M., Per. from English. - M .: Phoenix, 2004.- 300s

For the preparation of this work, materials from the site http://www.yspu.yar.ru

Self-test questions (p. 13)

Basic terms and concepts (p.12-13).

Topic (module) 3. Social interactions and social relations.

1. Social interaction (p.1-9):

a) the social mechanism of interaction, its main elements (p.1-3);

b) typology of social interactions (p.3-4);

c) social communication and its models; typology of communication interactions (p.4-7);

d) mass communication and its main functions (p.7-9).

2. Structure of social relations (9-12):

a) the concept of social relations (p.9-10);

b) level typology of social relations (p.10-11);

c) official and unofficial relations, the main differences between them (p.11-12).

a)social mechanism of interaction, its main elements.

Communicating with peers, acquaintances, relatives, colleagues, just with random fellow travelers, each person carries out various interactions. In any of these interactions, he simultaneously manifests his individual originality in two interrelated directions. On the one hand, he acts as a performer of certain role functions: husband or wife, boss or subordinate, father or son, etc. On the other hand, in any of the roles he performs, he simultaneously interacts with other people as a unique, inimitable personality.

When an individual performs a certain role, he acts as a specific unit of a well-defined social structure - a factory manager, a shop manager, a foreman, a worker, a department head, a teacher, a curator, a student, etc. In society, in each of its structures - be it a family, a school, an enterprise - there is a certain agreement, often documented (rules internal regulations, charter, code of officer honor, etc.), regarding the contribution that must be made to the common cause, therefore, in the process of interaction with others, each performer of such a role. In such cases, the performance of certain roles does not necessarily have to be accompanied by any feelings, although the manifestation of the latter is by no means excluded.

But in interactions between people there is a much more extensive and diverse class of interpersonal relationships in which there are specific, emotionally very rich roles (friend, father, rival, etc.), inextricably linked with feelings of sympathy or antipathy, friendship or hostility, respect or contempt.

Individual mutual reactions of people to each other in such interactions can vary dramatically in a very wide range: from love at first sight to sudden hostility to another person. In the process of such interaction, as a rule, not only perception each other's people, but mutual evaluation each other, inevitably including not only cognitive, but also emotional components.

What has been said is enough to define the social process under consideration. social interaction – it is an exchange of actions between two or more individuals. It can take place at the micro level - between people, small groups, and the macro level - between social groups, classes, nations, social movements. This is a system of socially conditioned individual and/or group actions, when the behavior of one of the participants is both a stimulus and a reaction to the behavior of the others and acts as a reason for subsequent actions.

In the process of interaction, there is a division and cooperation of functions, and, consequently, mutual coordination of joint actions. Say, in football, the consistency of the actions of the goalkeeper, defenders and attackers; at the plant - director, chief engineer, shop manager, foreman, worker, etc.

There are four main feature social interaction:

1. objectivity- the presence of an external goal in relation to interacting individuals or groups, the implementation of which implies the need to combine efforts, be it the same football or the work of any workshop of the Minsk Automobile Plant.

2. situationality- rather strict regulation by the specific conditions of the situation in which the interaction process takes place: if we are in the theater, we react to what is happening in a completely different way than when we are at a football match or a country picnic.

3. Explication- availability for an outside observer of the external expression of the interaction process, be it a game, dance or work at a factory.

4. Reflexive polysemy- the possibility for interaction to be a manifestation of both special subjective intentions, and an unconscious or conscious consequence of the joint participation of people in various activities (play, work, for example).

The process of interaction has two sides - objective and subjective. objective side interactions are connections that do not depend on individuals or groups, but mediate and regulate the content and nature of their interaction (for example, the content of joint work in an enterprise). Subjective side- this is a conscious, often emotionally saturated attitude of individuals to each other, based on mutual expectations of appropriate behavior.

social mechanism interaction is quite complex. In the simplest case, it includes the following components: 1) individuals (or groups of them) who commit certain actions in relation to each other; 2) changes in the external world, made by these actions;

3) changes in the inner world of the individuals participating in the interaction (in their thoughts, feelings, assessments, etc.); 4) the impact of these changes on other individuals; 5) the back reaction of the latter to such influence.

b) typology of social interactions.

A specific feature of interaction is the exchange of actions. Its structure is quite simple:

- exchange agents- two or more people;

- exchange process- actions performed according to certain rules;

- exchange rules- verbal or written instructions, assumptions and prohibitions;

- subject of exchange– goods, services, gifts, etc.;

- place of exchange- a predetermined or spontaneous meeting place.

Actions are divided into four types:

1) physical action, slap in the face, transfer of a book, writing on paper;

2) verbal action, insult, greeting;

3) gestures, handshake;

4) mental action, inner speech.

Social interaction includes the first three, and does not include the fourth kind of action. As a result, we get first typology social interaction (by type):

1) physical;

2) verbal;

3) gestural.

Second typology social action (by spheres, as systems of statuses):

1) economic sphere, where individuals act as owners and employees, entrepreneurs, rentiers, unemployed;

2) professional area, where individuals participate as drivers, builders, miners, doctors;

3) family and related sphere where people act as fathers, mothers, children, relatives;

4) demographic sphere are members of political parties, social movements, judges, policemen, diplomats;

5) religious sphere implies contacts between representatives of different religions, one religion, believers and non-believers;

6) territorial-settlement sphere- clashes, cooperation, competition between local and newcomers, urban and rural, etc.;

It is customary to distinguish three main forms of interaction(according to the ways of coordinating their goals, means of achieving them and results):

1. Cooperation- cooperation of different individuals (groups) to solve a common problem.

2. Competition- individual or group struggle (rivalry) for the possession of scarce values ​​(benefits).

3. Conflict- hidden or open clash of competing parties.

It can arise both in cooperation and in competition.

AT general view social interaction is a complex system of exchanges conditioned by ways of balancing rewards and costs. If the expected costs are greater than the expected rewards, people are less likely to interact unless they are forced to.

Ideally, the exchange of actions should take place on an equivalent basis, but in reality there are constant deviations from this. This creates the most complex pattern of human interaction: deceit, personal gain, selflessness, fair remuneration, and so on.

c) Social communication and its models. Typology of communication interactions.

In social interactions, various types of communication play a huge role (from Latin communicatio - message, transmission), i.e. communication between people and their communities, without which there can be no groups, no social organizations and institutions, no society as a whole.

Communication - this is the transfer of information from one social system to another, the exchange of information between different systems through symbols, signs, images. Communication between individuals, their groups, organizations, states, cultures - is carried out in the process of communication as an exchange of special sign formations (messages), which reflect the thoughts, ideas, knowledge, experience, skills, value orientations, programs of activity of the communicating parties.

The communication process is a necessary prerequisite for the formation, development and functioning of all social systems, because it is it that ensures the connection between people and their communities, makes possible the connection between generations, the accumulation and transfer of social experience, the organization of joint activities, the transmission of culture. It is through communication that management is carried out, therefore it also represents a social mechanism through which power arises and is implemented in society.

In the process of studying communication processes, we developed various models social communication.

1. Who? (transmits a message) - communicator.

2. What? (transmitted) - message.

3. How? (transmitting) – channel.

4. To whom? (message sent) – audience.

5. With what effect? - efficiency.

The disadvantage of the model is that the emphasis is on the activity of the communicator, and the recipient (audience) is only the object of communication impact.

Interactionist model ( author T. Newcomb). It proceeds from the fact that the subjects of communication - the communicator and the recipient - are equal, connected both by mutual expectations and by a common interest in the subject of communication. Communication itself acts as a means of realizing such an interest. The effect of communication impact is in the convergence or separation of the points of view of the communicator and the recipient on a common subject.

This approach to communication highlights the achievement of agreement between communication partners.

He believes that the development of communicative means determines both the general character of culture and the change of historical eras. In the primitive era, people's communication was limited to oral speech and mythological thinking.

With the advent of writing, the type of communication also changed. Writing began to serve as a reliable preservation of past experience, meanings, knowledge, ideas, and also made it possible to supplement the old text with new elements or interpret it. As a result, society received a powerful weapon for introducing new meanings and images into circulation, which ensured the intensive development of fiction and science.

The third stage of the complication of communication interactions began with the invention of printing, which led to the triumph of visual perception, the formation of national languages ​​and states, and the spread of rationalism.

A new stage in communication processes has been the widespread use of modern audiovisual means of communication. Television and other means have radically transformed the environment in which modern humanity lives and communicates, and has dramatically expanded the scope and intensity of its communication links.

The basis of communication interactions is powerful streams information encrypted in complex computer programs.

These programs create a new "infosphere", lead to the emergence of a new "clip culture", which simultaneously leads to the massification of communication interactions and their demassification, individualization. Each of the recipients can selectively tune in to one of the many telecommunication processes or choose a communication option according to their own order. This is a new communication situation, which is characterized by a constantly changing variety of new cultures and the emergence of many different communication interactions.

According to Luhmann, it is with the help of communication that society self-organizes and self-references itself, i.e. comes to self-understanding, to the distinction between itself and the environment, and also reproduces itself, that is, it is an autopoietic system. This means that the concept of communication becomes decisive for the definition of the concept of "society". “Only with the help of the concept of communication,” Luhmann emphasizes, “can a social system be thought of as an autopoietic system that consists of elements, namely: communications that produce and reproduce themselves through a network of communications.”

The typology of communication interactions is important.

It can be done for several reasons. Depending on the content These processes are divided into:

1) informative, aimed at transmitting information from the communicator to the recipient;

2) managerial, focused on the transfer of instructions by the control system to the controlled subsystem, in order to implement management decisions;

3) acoustic, designed for auditory perception by the recipient of information flows coming from the communicator ( sound speech, radio signals, audio recordings) and to receive auditory reactions to sound signals;

4) optical, focused on the visual-visual perception of information coming from the communicator to the recipient and the corresponding response of the latter;

5) tactile, including the transmission and perception of information by influencing the tactile sensitivity of individuals (touch, pressure, vibration, etc.);

6) emotive associated with the emergence of emotional experiences of joy, fear, admiration, etc. in the subjects participating in communications that can be embodied in various forms activity.

By forms and means Communication interaction expressions can be divided into:

1) verbal, embodied in written and oral speech;

2) symbolic-sign and object-sign expressed in works of fine art, in sculpture, architecture;

3) paralinguistic transmitted through gestures, facial expressions, pantomimes;

4) hypnosuggestive- processes of influence - the impact of the communicator on the mental sphere of the recipient (hypnosis, coding);

In accordance with level, scale and context Communication is divided into the following types:

1. Traditional Communication carried out mainly in the local rural environment: communication is consistent

2. Functional-role communication, developing in an urban environment, in conditions of significant differentiation of activities and lifestyles.

3. Interpersonal communication- this type of communication interaction, in which separate individuals act as both the sender and the recipient of the message. There are personal and role interindividual communication. The content and form of personal communication are not bound by strict rules, but have an individualized informal character. The role-playing variety of interpersonal communication is more formalized, and the process of transferring information is focused on achieving a certain result, for example, on completing a task assigned by a manager to a subordinate or a teacher to a student.

4. Group communication is a type of communication interaction in which communication takes place between two or large quantity members of a certain group (territorial, professional, religious, etc.) in order to organize interdependent actions. It forms the basis of communication interactions in social organizations.

5. Intergroup communication- this is a type of communication interaction, during which information flows circulate between two or more social groups in order to carry out joint activities or counteract each other.

Such communication can perform an informational or educational function (a group of teachers performs in front of a group of students), an entertaining or educational function (a theater group performs in front of people in the auditorium), a mobilization-organizing function (a propaganda group performs in front of the gathered people), an instigating function (a theater group performs in front of a crowd a group of demagogues speaks).

6. Mass communication - (see next question).

d) mass communication and its main functions.

mass communication- this is a type of communication processes that, based on the use of technical means of replicating and transmitting messages, cover large masses of people, and the media (mass media) - the press, book publishers, press agencies, radio, television act as communicators in them. This is the systematic dissemination of messages among numerically large, dispersed audiences with the aim of informing and exerting an ideological, political, economic impact on people's assessments, opinions and behavior.

The main feature of mass communication is the combination of the institutionally organized production of information with its dispersal, mass distribution and consumption.

(Information- message about any event; intelligence,

a collection of any data. The term "information" in translation from

Latin means "exposition", "explanation".

In everyday life, this word is understood as information transmitted

people orally, in writing or otherwise. Scientific disciplines

use this term, putting their content into it.

In mathematical information theory, information is not understood as

any information, but only those that remove completely or reduce

the uncertainty that exists before they are received. That is, information

This is the removed uncertainty. Modern philosophers define

information as reflected diversity.

What gives a person the possession of information? Orientation in what is happening, determining the direction of one's own activity, the ability to make the right decisions.

Mass Information- printed, audiovisual and other

messages and materials publicly distributed through the media;

social and political resource).

The material prerequisite for the emergence of mass communications is an invention at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. telegraph, cinema, radio, sound recording technology. Based on these inventions, MASS MEDIA.

In recent years, the media have become one of the most effective ways of shaping public opinion and organizing control over mass consciousness and behavior ( mass consciousness- consciousness of classes,

social groups; includes ideas, views, myths common in society; is formed both purposefully (media) and spontaneously).

The main functions that mass communication performs in society are: 1) informing about ongoing events; 2) the transfer of knowledge about society from one generation to another through socialization and training; 3) purposeful influence on the formation of certain stereotypes of people's behavior; 4) assistance to society in understanding and solving urgent problems; 5) entertainment.

So, the media have a powerful purposeful influence on people, on their preferences and life positions. However, studies conducted by sociologists from different countries have shown that the impact of mass communication on individuals and social groups is mediated by some intermediate social variables. The most important of them are: the position of the group to which the recipient belongs; selectivity, i.e. the ability and desire of a person to select the information that is consistent with his values, opinions and positions. Therefore, in the process of mass communication, many recipients act not as a passive recipient of information, but as an active filter. They carry out the selection of certain types of media messages in order to satisfy one or another of their needs.

We cannot leave aside another acute problem associated with the functioning of mass communication: the problem of its negative impact on certain groups of people. An excessively concentrated impact of mass communication can negatively affect the content, the quality of interpersonal communication, both for adults and (especially!) children; reduce interest in active forms of assimilation of cultural values, take a person away from problems and difficulties real life, exacerbate his loneliness, maladaptation to changing conditions of life and the surrounding social environment.

Of course, mass communication also has a positive impact on a person. It promotes curiosity, awareness, erudition, the growth of political culture, compliance with social norms and rules.

As you know, the structural features of any complex system, whatever the nature of its origin, depend not only on what elements are included in its composition, but also on how they are interconnected, connected, what effect they have on each other. friend. In essence, it is the nature of the connection between the elements that determines both the integrity of the system and the emergence of emergent properties, which is its most characteristic property as a whole. This is true for any systems - both for fairly simple, elementary, and for the most complex systems known to us - social ones.

The concept of "emergent properties" was formulated by T. Parsons in 1937 in his analysis of social systems. In doing so, he had in mind three interconnected conditions.

¦ Firstly, social systems have a structure that does not arise by itself, but precisely from the processes of social interaction.

¦ Secondly, these emergent properties cannot be reduced (reduced) to a simple sum of biological or psychological characteristics social figures: for example, the characteristics of a particular culture cannot be explained by correlating it with the biological qualities of people who are carriers of this culture.

¦ Thirdly, the meaning of any social action cannot be understood in isolation from the social context of the social system in which it is manifested.

Perhaps, Pitirim Sorokin considered the problems of social interaction most scrupulously and in detail, devoting a significant part of the first volume of "The System of Sociology" to them. Let's try, following the classic of Russian and American sociology, to understand the elementary concepts of this most important social process, linking many disparate people into a single whole - society and, moreover, turning purely biological individuals into people - that is, into reasonable, thinking and, most importantly, , social creatures.

In the same way as O. Comte once, P. A. Sorokin expressed confidence that a single individual cannot be considered as an elementary “social cell” or the simplest social phenomenon: “... an individual as an individual cannot in any way be considered microcosm of the social macrocosm. It cannot, because only an individual can be obtained from an individual and neither what is called "society" nor what is called "social phenomena" can be obtained ... For the latter, not one, but many individuals, at least two, are required.

However, in order for two or more individuals to form a single whole, which could be considered as a particle (element) of society, their presence alone is not enough. It is also necessary that they interact with each other, that is, they exchange some actions and responses to these actions. What is interaction from the point of view of a sociologist? The definition that Sorokin gives to this concept is quite extensive and claims to embrace the almost immense, that is, all possible options: “The phenomenon of human interaction is given when: a) mental experiences or b) external acts, or c) both of one (some) people represent a function of the existence and state (mental and physical) of another or other individuals.

This definition, perhaps, is truly universal, because it includes both cases of direct, direct contacts between people and variants of indirect interaction. It is not difficult to be convinced of this by considering a wide variety of examples that occur in the daily life of each of us.

If someone (accidentally or intentionally) stepped on your foot in a crowded bus (external act) and this caused you to resent (psychic experience) and exclaim indignantly (external act), then this means that an interaction has occurred between you. If you are a sincere admirer of Michael Jackson's work, then, probably, each appearance of him on the TV screen in the next clip (and the recording of this clip probably required the singer to perform many external acts and experience many mental experiences) will cause you a storm of emotions (psychic experiences), or maybe you jump up from the couch and start singing along and “dancing” (thus performing external acts). At the same time, we are no longer dealing with direct, but with indirect interaction: Michael Jackson, of course, cannot observe your reaction to the recording of his song and dance, but there is hardly any doubt that he was counting on such a response from millions of his fans, planning and carrying out their physical actions (external acts). So this example also shows us a case of social interaction.

Tax department officials developing a new fiscal project, State Duma deputies discussing this project, amending it, and then voting for the adoption of the relevant law, the president signing a decree on the introduction of a new law into force, many entrepreneurs and consumers whose income will be influence of this law - they are all in a complex intertwined process of interaction with each other, and most importantly - with us. There is no doubt that here there is a very serious influence of both external acts and the mental experiences of some people on the mental experiences and external acts of other people, although in most cases the participants in this chain may not even see each other (at best, on a TV screen).

It is important to note this point. Interaction always causes some physical changes in our biological organism. For example, our cheeks “flash” when looking at a loved one (vessels under the skin expand and experience a rush of blood); listening to an audio recording of a popular singer we love, we experience emotional arousal, etc.

What are the basic conditions for the emergence of any social interaction? P. A. Sorokin introduces and analyzes in detail three such conditions (or, as he calls them, “elements”):

3) the presence of conductors that transmit these influences and the effects of individuals on each other.

We, in turn, could add a fourth condition here, which Sorokin does not mention:

Now let's try to take a closer look at each of these four conditions.

1. Obviously, in an empty space (or in a space filled only with plants and animals) no social interaction can occur. It can hardly occur where there is only one human individual. Robinson's relationship with his parrot and goat cannot be recognized as patterns (samples) of social interaction. At the same time, the mere fact of the presence of two or more individuals is still not enough for interaction to arise between them. These individuals must have the ability and desire to influence each other and respond to such influence. Among the ten basic needs of homo sapiens, which P. A. Sorokin singles out in his classification, at least five are closely related to the desire of any person to have contacts with other people, and it is simply impossible to satisfy them outside of such contacts.

True, it should be noted that most of these needs are by no means innate; they arise only in the course of interaction. However, the question of which of them - needs or the process of interaction - is ultimately the cause and which is the effect, has as much chance of being answered as the question of which is primary - the chicken or the egg.

2. As was stated in the definition given at the beginning of this paragraph, interaction occurs only when at least one of the two individuals has an impact on the other, in other words, performs some deed, action, act aimed at the other. Indeed, it is possible (albeit with difficulty) to imagine an arbitrarily large number of people gathered in one territory within the immediate reach (visibility and audibility) of each other, but at the same time completely ignoring each other, occupied exclusively with themselves. and your inner feelings. And in this case, we can hardly say that there is an interaction between them.

3. The condition for the presence of special conductors that transmit an irritating effect from some participants in the interaction to others is quite closely related to the fact that the information transmitted during the interaction is always imprinted on some kind of material carriers.

Strictly speaking, information cannot exist outside of material carriers. Even at the deepest and most unconscious – genetic – level, information is recorded on material carriers – in DNA molecules. The elementary information that animals exchange with each other is also transmitted with the help of material carriers. The loose tail of a male peacock is perceived by the female through the perception of light waves by the organs of vision. Alarm signals (warnings of potential danger) are transmitted and perceived by members of the pack (any - be it a rook or a wolf) using sound waves; the same applies to the calling trills of the male nightingale, perceived by the female with the help of air vibrations. Ants communicate with each other, secreting portions of certain odorous substances with special glands: the olfactory organs of insects perceive the molecules of a particular substance as a smell, deciphering the information contained in it. In a word, in all cases information is transmitted and received with the help of various material carriers. However, these natural material carriers are extremely short-lived, most of them exist only during the period of transmission and reception, after which they disappear forever. They need to be re-created each time.

Perhaps the most significant difference between human (and therefore social) interaction and communication between animals is the presence of the so-called second signaling system! This is a system of conditioned reflex connections peculiar only to a person, formed under the influence of speech signals, i.e., in fact, not the most direct stimulus - sound or light, but its symbolic verbal designation.

Of course, these combinations of sound or light waves are also transmitted using short-lived material carriers, however, unlike momentary, instantaneous information transmitted by animals, information expressed in symbols can be recorded (and subsequently, after an arbitrarily long period of time, reproduced, perceived, deciphered and used) on such material media that are preserved for a long time, being imprinted on stone, wood, paper, film and magnetic tape, magnetic disk. They, unlike natural carriers that exist in nature in finished form, are produced by people, are artificial objects. Information is imprinted on them in a sign-symbolic form by changing certain physical parameters of the carriers themselves. This is precisely the fundamental basis for the emergence and development of social memory. The second signal system itself, being the basis for the emergence of generalized abstract thinking, can develop only in the course of specific social interaction.

One way or another, if there are no conductors acting as carriers of material information carriers, there can be no talk of any interaction. However, when the conductors are present, neither space nor time will be an obstacle to the implementation of interaction. You can call your friend from Moscow to Los Angeles, located on the other side of the globe (conductor - telephone cable or radio waves transmitted using an artificial Earth satellite), or write him a letter (conductor - paper and mail delivery) and thus enter into interaction with him. Moreover, you interact with the founder of sociology, Auguste Comte (who has been dead for a hundred and fifty years) by reading his books. Look what a long chain of interactions runs between you, how many social actors are included in it (editors, typesetters, translators, publishers, booksellers, librarians) - after all, they, in turn, also act as conductors of this interaction.

Thus, in the presence of conductors, "in fact, neither space nor time is an obstacle to the interaction of people."

We have already noted above that sociology, in contrast to such scientific disciplines as, for example, psychology or social psychology, studies not only the direct and immediate interaction that occurs in the course of direct contacts between individuals. The object of her research are all types of social interactions. You interact with a lot of people you know and don't know when you speak on the radio, publish an article in a magazine or newspaper, or, being a high-level official, put your signature on a document that affects the lives of a fairly large number of citizens. And in all these cases it is impossible to do without material carriers of information, as well as certain conductors that transmit this information.

4. We considered it necessary to supplement the list of conditions for the emergence of social interaction proposed by P. A. Sorokin with one more thing – what we called the presence of a common basis1 for contacts between social subjects. In the most general case, this means that any effective interaction can occur only when both parties speak the same language. We are talking not only about a single linguistic base of communication, but also about the same understanding of the norms, rules, principles that guide the interaction partner. Otherwise, the interaction may either remain unfulfilled or lead to a result, sometimes directly opposite to that expected by both parties.

Finally, the most general approach to considering the essence of social interaction requires classifying them, that is, compiling a certain typology of interactions. As you know, the compilation of any typology is based on the choice of a certain criterion - a system-forming feature. P. A. Sorokin identifies three main features that make it possible to develop three different approaches to the typology of social interactions, respectively. Let's take a brief look at them.

1. The typology of social interactions is compiled depending on the quantity and quality of individuals participating in the interaction process. If we talk about quantity, then only three options for interactions can arise here:

a) occurring between two single individuals;

b) between a single individual and a group;

c) between two groups. Each of these types has its own specifics and differs significantly in character from the others, as Sorokin points out, "even under the premise of qualitative homogeneity of individuals."

As for quality, this criterion indicates, first of all, the need to take into account the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the interacting subjects. A great variety of criteria for homogeneity or heterogeneity can be singled out, it is hardly possible to take into account even any of their complete set. Therefore, Sorokin lists the most important of them. In his opinion, special attention should be paid to belonging to:

a) one family

a) different families

b) one State

b") to different states

c) one race

c")» races

d)" language group

d")» language groups

e) one gender

e")» to the floor

f)» age

f")» age

m) similar in profession, degree of wealth, religion, scope of rights and obligations, political party, scientific, artistic, literary tastes, etc.

m") different in profession, property status, religion, scope of rights, political party, etc.

"The similarity or difference of interacting individuals in one of these relations is of great importance for the nature of the interaction."

2. The typology of social interactions is compiled depending on the nature of the acts (actions) performed by the interacting subjects. Here, too, it is impossible or extremely difficult to cover the full range of options; Sorokin himself lists some of them, the most important. We will simply name these options, and the interested reader can read them in more detail in the original source.

1) depending on doing and not doing (abstinence and patience);

2) interaction is unilateral and bilateral;

3) long-term and temporary interaction;

4) antagonistic and solidaristic interaction;

5) interaction is template and non-template;

6) interaction conscious and unconscious;

7) intellectual, sensory-emotional and volitional interaction.

3. And, finally, the typology of social interactions is compiled depending on the conductors. Here Sorokin distinguishes: a) forms of interaction depending on the nature of the conductors (sound, light-color, motor-mimic, subject-symbolic, through chemical reagents, mechanical, thermal, electrical); b) direct and indirect interaction.

In addition, in the first volume of "Systems of Sociology" there is a reference to other methods of classification developed by other sociologists.

§ 2. Interpretations of social interaction in special sociological theories

So, the concept of social interaction is central in sociology due to the fact that a number of sociological theories have arisen that develop and interpret its various problems and aspects at two main levels of research, as we have already mentioned, the microlevel and the macrolevel. At the micro level, the processes of communication between individuals who are in direct and immediate contact are studied; such interaction occurs mainly within small groups. At the macro level of social interaction, the interaction of large social groups and structures arises; here the interest of researchers covers, first of all, social institutions. In this section, we will briefly review only some of the most common theories and their "offshoots".

One of the most well-known and thoroughly developed concepts describing social interaction is the exchange theory. In general, the conceptualization of social interaction, social structure and social order in terms of the exchange of relations has long been the focus of such a scientific discipline as anthropology, but only relatively recently has it been adopted by sociologists. The intellectual foundations of the idea of ​​exchange are described in detail in classical political economy, whose founders Bentham and Smith believed that the main driving factor in the activity of any human being should be considered the desire for utility and gain. At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, many works on social anthropology pointed out the important role of exchange transactions in the life of primitive tribes.

One of the initial premises on which the theory of exchange is based is the assumption that in the social behavior of any person there is a certain rational principle that encourages him to behave prudently and constantly strive to obtain a wide variety of "benefits" - in the form of goods, money, services. , prestige, respect, approval, success, friendship, love, etc. In the early 1960s, the American sociologist George Homans came to the conclusion that such notions as "status", "role", , "power", etc., should be explained not by the action of macrosocial structures, as is customary in functionalism, but from the point of view of those social relations that give rise to them. The essence of these relations, according to Homans, is the desire of people to receive benefits and rewards, as well as in the exchange of these benefits and rewards.

Proceeding from this, Homans explores social interaction in terms of the exchange of actions between the “Actor” and the “Other”, assuming that in such an interaction each of the parties will seek to extract the maximum benefit and minimize its costs. Among the most important of the expected rewards, he refers, in particular, to social approval. The mutual reward that arises in the course of the exchange of actions becomes repetitive and regular, and gradually develops into relationships between people based on mutual expectations. In such a situation, the violation of expectations on the part of one of the participants entails frustration and, as a result, the emergence of an aggressive reaction; at the same time, the very manifestation of aggressiveness becomes, to a certain extent, satisfaction.

These ideas were developed by another contemporary American sociologist, Peter Blau, who argued that practically “all human contact rests on the scheme of giving and returning the equivalence.” Of course, these conclusions were borrowed from the ideas market economy and behavioral psychology. In general, theories of exchange see a similarity between social interactions and economic or market transactions carried out in the hope that services rendered will somehow be returned. Thus, the basic paradigm of the exchange theory is a dyadic (two-personal) model of interaction. We repeat that the emphasis is on mutual exchange, although the basis of interaction still remains calculated and plus this includes a certain amount of trust or mutually shared moral principles.

This kind of approach almost inevitably faces a number of criticisms. The content of these remarks is as follows.

¦ The psychological premises of the exchange theory are too simplistic and place excessive emphasis on the selfish, calculating elements of individuality.

¦ The theory of exchange, in fact, is limited in development, since it cannot move from a two-person level of interaction to social behavior on a larger scale: as soon as we move from a dyad to a wider set, the situation acquires considerable uncertainty and complexity.

¦ The theory of exchange is not able to explain many social processes, such as the dominance of generalized values, which cannot be extracted from the paradigm of dyadic exchange.

¦ Finally, some critics argue that the theory of exchange is just "an elegant conceptualization of sociological triviality."

Given this, the followers of Homans (Blau, Emerson) tried to be more flexible in order to bridge the gap between the micro and macro levels that the exchange theory created. In particular, Peter Blau proposed to conduct research on social interaction by synthesizing the principles of social exchange with the concepts of such macrosociological concepts as structural functionalism and conflict theory.

One of the modifications of the exchange theory is the theory of rational choice that arose in the 80s of the twentieth century. This is a relatively formal approach, stating that social life can in principle be explained as the result of "rational" choices of social actors. “When faced with several possible courses of action, people usually do what they believe should, with a certain degree of probability, lead them to the best overall outcome. This deceptively simple sentence sums up rational choice theory.” Characteristic of this form of theorizing is the desire to apply technically rigorous models of social behavior that help to draw clear conclusions from a relatively small number of initial theoretical assumptions about "rational behavior".

Another influential theory that aims to explain social interaction is symbolic interactionism. This theoretical and methodological direction focuses on the analysis of social interactions mainly in their symbolic content. In essence, even Sorokin pointed out that, unlike animals, people endow their actions and the actions of other people with certain symbolic meanings that go beyond their purely physical meaning. Followers of symbolic interactionism argue that any actions of people are manifestations of social behavior based on communication; communication becomes possible due to the fact that those people who come into contact to exchange information attach the same meaning to the same symbol. At the same time, special attention is paid to the analysis of language as the main symbolic mediator of interaction. Interaction is thus seen as "a continuous dialogue between people in which they observe, comprehend each other's intentions and react to them." The very concept of symbolic interactionism was introduced back in 1937 by the American sociologist G. Bloomer, who summarized the basic principles of this approach from the standpoint of three assumptions:

a) human beings perform their actions in relation to certain objects on the basis of the values ​​that they attach to these objects;

b) these meanings arise from social interaction;

c) any social action results from the adaptation to each other of individual lines of behavior.

George Herbert Mead is considered one of the founders of the concept of symbolic interactionism (N. J. Smelser generally calls him the author of this theory). Mead was a professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago, he never considered himself anything but a philosopher, and did quite complex research within this science. Nevertheless, his contribution to American philosophy has remained, it is believed, very superficial, but his influence on American sociology and social psychology has been enormous. The work that most ensured this influence was not published until after his death. In fact, it was a series of author's lectures, collected by his followers into a book, which they called "Mind, self and society." In this work, Mead analyzes in great detail how social processes create the human self (a person's awareness of himself and his special place in society), emphasizing that it is impossible to understand the individual without understanding him in a social context. At the same time, Mead uses the concept of role as a key one. Later, Mead's work on social philosophy became the basis for the development of the so-called "role theory", which found its place in American sociology. Mead's influence has remained very strong to this day, and he is generally regarded as one of the most significant figures in that school of sociology and social psychology that is today called symbolic interactionism.

"Playing roles" in addition to the general teaching function also has the function of conveying social meanings "for reality". How Russian children will play the roles of policemen and crooks in their games will greatly depend on what this role means in their direct social experience. For a child from an intelligent wealthy family, a policeman is a figure full of authority, confidence, readiness to protect ordinary citizens, who can be turned to in case of trouble. For a marginalized child, the same role is likely to be one of hostility and danger, more of a threat than trust, someone to be run from rather than resorted to. We may also assume that in American children's games, the roles of Indians and cowboys will have different meanings in a white suburb or on an Indian reservation.

Thus, socialization proceeds in the continuous interaction of a person with other people. But not all others with whom the child deals are equally important in this process. Some of them are clearly of "central" importance to him. For most children, these are parents, as well as, to one degree or another, brothers and sisters. In some cases, this group is supplemented by figures such as grandparents, close friends of parents, and playmates. There are other people who remain in the background and whose place in the process of socialization can best be described as background influence. These are all kinds of casual contacts - from the postman to a neighbor who is seen only occasionally. If we consider socialization as a kind of dramatic performance, then it can be described from the point of view of ancient Greek theater, where some of the participants act as the main characters of the play (protagonists), while others function as a chorus.

Mead calls the main characters in the drama of socialization significant others. These are the people with whom the child interacts most frequently, with whom he has important emotional connections, and whose attitudes and roles are decisive in his position. Obviously, in what happens in a child's life, it is very important who these significant others are. By this we mean not only their idiosyncrasies and quirks, but also their location in the larger society. In the early phases of socialization, whatever attitudes and roles are assumed by the child, they are received precisely from significant others. They are, in a very real sense, the child's social world.

However, as socialization proceeds, the child begins to feel that these particular attitudes and roles correspond to a much more general reality. The child begins to understand, for example, that it is not only his mother who is angry with him when he urinates; that this anger is shared by every other significant adult he knows, and indeed by the adult world at large. It is at this moment that the child begins to relate not only to concrete significant others, but also to the generalized other (another concept of Mead), which represents society in its entirety. This process is easy to follow if you analyze the language of the baby. In the earlier phase, the child seems to be saying to himself (in many cases he really does): "Mom doesn't want me to piss." After the discovery of the generalized other, it becomes something like this statement: "This cannot be done." Concrete attitudes now become universal. The specific commands and prohibitions of individual others become generalized norms. This stage is very decisive in the process of socialization.

According to some sociologists, symbolic interactionism provides a more realistic view of the mechanisms of social interaction than exchange theory. However, he focuses his attention on the subjective representations of interacting individuals, each of which, in essence, is unique and unrepeatable. Therefore, on its basis, it is rather difficult to make generalizations that could be applied to a wide variety of life situations.

Let us briefly mention two more influential sociological concepts of interaction - ethnomethodology and the concept of impression management.

The first of these, ethnomethodology, seeks to adopt the research methods that anthropologists and ethnographers use to study primitive cultures and communities by making them sociologically universal. The basic assumption here is that the rules that govern human contact are usually taken on faith, ready-made. Thus, ethnomethodology aims to investigate how people ("members") construct their world. Its subject is the hidden, unconscious mechanisms of social communication between people. At the same time, all forms of social communication are reduced to a large extent to verbal communication, to everyday conversations. One of the ethnomethodological research methods is illustrated by some of the experiments of their founder Harold Garfinkel on the destruction of the stereotypes of everyday life. Garfinkel asked his students to behave as if they were lodgers or hotel guests when they arrived home. The reactions of parents and relatives were dramatic, at first bewildered, then even hostile. For Garfinkel, this illustrates how carefully, even delicately, the social order of everyday life is constructed. In other studies (for example, the behavior of jurors), he studied how people construct their order in various situations, completely taking it for granted. J. Turner formulated the program position of ethnomethodology as follows: "The features of the rationality of behavior must be identified in the behavior itself."

The second sociological concept of interaction - the concept of impression management - was developed by Erwin Goffman. The main interest of his research was connected with the elements of fleeting meetings, the possibilities inherent in momentary collisions, that is, with the sociology of everyday life. In order to study and understand the order of these social encounters, Hoffmann used drama as an analogy for staging them, which is why his concept is sometimes referred to as the dramatic approach (or dramatic interactionism). The main idea of ​​this approach is that in the process of interaction, people usually play a kind of "show" in front of each other, directing the impressions about themselves perceived by others. Social roles are thus analogous to theater roles. People design their own images, usually in ways that best serve their own purposes. The regulation of interactions between people is based on the expression of symbolic meanings that are beneficial to them, and they often themselves create situations in which, as they believe, they can make the most favorable impression on others.

1. According to the universal definition of P. Sorokin, the phenomenon of social interaction “is given when: a) mental experiences or b) external acts, or c) both of one (some) people represent a function of the existence and state (mental and physical) of another or other individuals.

2. The conditions for the emergence of any social interaction are defined as follows:

1) the presence of two or more individuals that determine the behavior and experiences of each other;

2) the commission by them of some actions that affect mutual experiences and actions;

3) the presence of conductors that transmit these influences and the effects of individuals on each other;

4) the presence of a common basis for contacts, contact.

3. In accordance with the concept of P. Sorokin, three typologies of interaction can be distinguished depending on the choice of system-forming features:

1) the number and quality of participants in the interaction;

2) the nature of the acts performed by the participants in the interaction;

3) the nature of the conductors of interaction.

4. A number of sociological concepts have been developed that describe and interpret the mechanisms of social interaction. According to the theory of exchange, any social interaction can be likened to the relationship of a seller and a buyer in the market; the reward that arises in the course of interaction becomes repetitive and regular, gradually developing into relationships between people based on mutual expectations. According to the concept of symbolic interactionism, social life depends on our ability to imagine ourselves in other social roles, and this acceptance of the role of the other depends on our ability to internally talk with ourselves. Proponents of ethnomethodology proceed from the fact that the rules governing contacts between people are usually accepted by them on faith, in a ready-made form. The concept of impression management (dramaturgical interactionism) states that the regulation of interactions between people is based on the expression of symbolic meanings that are beneficial to them, and they often themselves create situations in which, as they believe, they can make the most favorable impression on others.

test questions

1. What are "emergent properties"?

2. How is the interaction of people different from the interaction between any other living beings?

3. Describe four conditions for the emergence of social interaction.

4. What is main feature conductors of social interaction?

5. What are the main foundations of the typology of social interactions defined by P. A. Sorokin?

6. What is the essence of the exchange theory?

7. On what fundamental principles is the concept of symbolic interactionism based?

8. What is a “significant other”?

9. On what basic assumption is ethnomethodology based? 10. What is the essence of dramatic interactionism?

1. Abercrombie N, Hill S., Turner S. Sociological Dictionary / Per. from English. – Kazan, 1997.

2. Andreeva G. M. Social psychology. - M., 1988.

3. Antipina G. S. Theoretical and methodological problems of studying small groups. - L., 1982.

4. Bloomer G. Collective behavior // American sociological thought. - M., 1994.

5. Bobneva M. I. Social norms and regulation of behavior. - M., 1978.

6. Cooley C. Primary groups // American sociological thought. - M., 1994.

7. Kultygin V. P. The concept of social exchange in modern sociology // Sociological research. - 1997. No. 5.

8. Merton R. K. Social structure and anomie // Sociological research. – 1992. No. 3–4.

9. Mid J. From gesture to symbol. Internalized Others and the Self // American Sociological Thought. - M., 1994.

10. Riesman D. Some types of character and society // Sociological research. - 1993. No. 3, 5.

11. Smelzer N. J. Sociology. - M., 1994.

12. Modern Western Sociology: Dictionary. - M., 1990.

13. Sorokin P. A. The system of sociology. T. 1. - M., 1993.

14. Turner D. The structure of sociological theory. - M., 1985.

15. Freud Z. Psychology of the masses and analysis of the human self // Dialogue. -

16. Fromm E. Anatomy of human destructiveness // Sociological research. - 1992. No. 7.