The Interaction Order Sui Generis: Goffman's Contribution to Social Theory
Abstract
Goffinan is credited with enriching our understanding of the details of interaction, but not with challenging our theoretical understanding of social organization. While Goffman's position is not consistent, the outlines for a theory of an interaction order sui generis may be found in his work. It is not theoretically adequate to understand Goffinan as an interactionist within the dichotomy between agency and social structure. Goffman offers a way of resolving this dichotomy via the idea of an interaction order which is constitutive of self and at the same time places demands on social structure. This has significant implications for our understanding of social organization in general.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Goffman in fact saw moral constraints as the foundation of interaction.
“Referring to Goffman's ritualism, Rawls contends that Goffman in fact saw moral constraints as the foundation of interaction.”
From The inner stage: resituating Hochschild’s surface/deep binary from action to interaction (2025) · cites this paper as Rawls, 1987
To describe Goffman's work as a 'black-box psychology,' dismissive of 'the links between immediate social situations and macrostructure on the one hand, and individual personality on the other,' is to commit what Rawls identifies as a classical error in understanding Goffman: re-embedding him in 'the traditional dichotomy between agency and social structure'.
“To describe his work as a 'black-box psychology,' dismissive of 'the links between immediate social situations and macrostructure on the one hand, and individual personality on the other,' is to commit what Rawls identifies as a classical error in understanding Goffman: re-embedding him in 'the traditional dichotomy between agency and social structure' (1987: p. 136).”
From The inner stage: resituating Hochschild’s surface/deep binary from action to interaction (2025) · cites this paper as Rawls, 1987
Hochschild's interpretation of Goffman reflects a second common mistake, which Rawls highlights: assuming that because Goffman considered strategic interaction, he considered strategic action to be the basic form of action.
“This interpretation of Goffman reflects a second common mistake, which Rawls highlights: 'Because Goffman considered strategic interaction, it is assumed that Goffman considered strategic action to be the basic form of action' (1987: p. 136).”
From The inner stage: resituating Hochschild’s surface/deep binary from action to interaction (2025) · cites this paper as Rawls, 1987
Cites
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Body Techniques, Agency and Intercorporeality: On Goffman's Relations in Public
Crossley, N. (1995) · Sociology · doi:10.1177/0038038595029001009 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
The inner stage: resituating Hochschild’s surface/deep binary from action to interaction
Bjerre, J. (2025) · Theory and Society · doi:10.1007/s11186-025-09656-w
“…between immediate social situations and macrostructure on the one hand, and individual personality on the other,” is to commit what Rawls identifies as a classical error in understanding Goffman: re-embedding him in “the traditional dichotomy between agency and social structure” (1987: p. 136).”
Influential
- Authors
- Rawls, A. W.
- Corresponding author
- Rawls, Anne Warfield
- ORCID
- Rawls, Anne Warfield
- Venue
- Sociological Theory
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1987
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 136
- ISSN
- 0735-2751 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2335304763
- Cited by
- 390
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 34.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Sociological Theory (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Realism in Sociology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Weber, Simmel, Sociological Theory
- Keywords
- Erving Goffman, interaction order, interactionism, social organization, self, social structure
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
