Violence. Theories of interaction Founders of the theory of social roles

Theory of action(M. Weber, P. Sorokin, T. Parsons). Sociologist T. Parsons proposed a description of the structure of social action, which includes:

a) activist;

b) “other” (the object to which the action is directed);

c) norms (by which interaction is organized;

d) values ​​(which each participant accepts);

d) the situation (in which the action is performed).

This scheme turned out to be too abstract and therefore unsuitable for empirical analysis.

Social exchange theory (neobehaviorism) J. Homans. Homans believed that people interact with each other based on their experiences, weighing possible rewards and costs. Formulated 4 principles of interaction:

H The more a certain type of behavior is rewarded, the more often it will be repeated. E If the reward for certain types of behavior depends on certain conditions, the person strives to recreate these conditions. E If the reward is large, a person is willing to expend more effort to obtain it. TO When a person's needs are close to saturation, he is less willing to make efforts to satisfy them.

Thus, Homans views social interaction as a complex system of exchanges determined by ways of balancing rewards and costs.

Social bond theory J. Szczepansky. This theory describes the development of interaction. The central concept is that of social connection. It can be represented as a sequential implementation:

a) spatial contact;

b) mental contact (mutual interest);

c) social contact (joint activity);

d) interaction (defined as the systematic, constant implementation of actions aimed at eliciting an appropriate reaction from the partner);

d) social relations.

Psychoanalytic theory interactions (S. Freud, K. Horney, G. Sullivan). Z. Freud believed that interpersonal interaction is determined mainly by ideas acquired in early childhood and conflicts experienced during this period of life. The family is the prototype of relationships with the outside world.

K. Horney 3 possible compensating strategies that are developed from childhood and determine the nature of interaction with other people:

movement to people;

movement against people;

movement from people.

Usually all three strategies are used fairly evenly; the predominance of any one may indicate neurosis.

Impression management theory E. Hoffman. The theory is based on the assumption that social interaction situations resemble dramatic performances in which people, like actors, strive to create and maintain a favorable impression. In order to manifest and express symbolic meaning, with the help of which one can make a good impression on others, people themselves prepare and create appropriate situations. This concept is also called theory of social dramaturgy.

Interactionist theory(G. Blumer, J. Mead, C. Cooley, R. Linton, etc.). The key concept is “interaction” - hence the name of the direction within which the theory of symbolic interactionism and role theory were developed.

Symbolic interactionist theory J. Mead, G. Blumer. Any interaction between people is carried out using symbols. Without symbols there can be no human communication or human society, since symbols provide the means by which people can communicate. Blumer formulated 3 main points of the theory: h Human activity is carried out on the basis of the meanings that people attach to objects and events; uh These meanings are a product of interaction between individuals; h meanings are the result of the interpretation of the symbols surrounding each individual.

Role theory(T. Sarbin, J. Mead, T. Shibutani). For an interaction to continue, everyone involved must also interpret the intentions of others through “role taking.”

Social role –

1. a set of requirements imposed by society on persons occupying a certain social position;

2. the sum of a person’s expectations in relation to himself - “what I should be”;

3. real behavior of a person in a particular position.

T Shibutani (1969) distinguishes between conventional and interpersonal roles. Conventional roles mean a prescribed pattern of behavior that is expected and required of a person in a given situation. Learning these roles occurs through participation in organized groups. Interpersonal roles determined by the interaction of people with each other.

inclusion into interaction;control stage – establishing a hierarchy in relation, the desire to control the situation or, otherwise, to be under the control of another person; intimacy .

Experimental scheme for recording interactions R.F. Bales. Bales developed a scheme that makes it possible to record various types of human interaction according to a single plan. Using the observation method, real manifestations of interaction are recorded in accordance with 4 categories or areas of interaction:

Transactional Analysis Theory E. Berna.

E. Berne introduced the concept of transaction to designate the functional unit of communication. Transactionrepresents the interaction of two ego-states of individuals, where the ego-state is understood as the actual way of existence of the I – the subject. There are three main egos - states in which a person can be:

Ego state Parent manifests itself in a person’s desire to comply with the norms of social control, to implement ideal requirements, prohibitions, dogmas, etc.

Ego state Adult reveals itself in a person’s desire to realistically assess the situation and resolve all issues rationally and competently.

Ego state Child associated with the emotional experiences of the individual.

Table 3. External manifestations of ego states

Types of transactions:

Additional or parallel:transactions – stimulus and transaction – response do not intersect, but complement each other. There are equal and unequal additional transactions.

Intersecting:transactions – stimulus and transactions – response do not coincide (they are depicted in the diagram as intersecting vectors). It is intersecting transactions that are often the cause or consequence of conflict.

Hidden:those transactions whose meaning is not related to observable behavior; include simultaneously two levels - explicit, verbally expressed (social) and hidden, implied (psychological). Explicit and hidden interaction occurs from different positions. Usually, explicit interaction, open to others present, occurs from the Adult-Adult position; hidden interaction, directed only to the partner, occurs from a different position. Hidden transactions are angular and double.

Standard chains of transactions form games, which is opposed to spontaneous, open communication. Games are played to obtain certain “rewards”: stress relief, praise, time structuring, sympathy, etc. There are 3 types of games: victim, pursuer and deliverer.

In addition to analyzing games, E. Bern considered it important to analyze life scenarios. By script he meant "what a person plans to do in the future"(Bern E., 2003). He called what actually happens the path of life. The basis of a person’s life scenario is his Parental programming. The child accepts it for the following reasons:

he receives a ready-made goal in life, which otherwise he would have to choose himself;

parental programming gives the child a ready-made option for structuring his time, especially since it will be approved by the parents;

the child just needs to be explained how to do certain things and how to behave in certain situations (it’s interesting to find out everything on your own, but it’s very unproductive to learn from your mistakes).

The next step in transactional analysis is analysis. positions, which reflects a person’s attitude to the world in general, to his environment - friends and enemies. Positions can be two-sided or three-sided.

Double sided positions are based on the concepts of “good” (+) and “bad” (-). There are 4 main positions:

I (-) – You (+). I am bad, you are good. This is the position with which a person is born. From a psychological point of view, it is depressive, and from a social point of view, it is self-deprecation. In an adult, it can contribute to the emergence of envy towards others. And this position often encourages a child to imitate those around him, learn from them, it can transform over time into three others;

I (+) – You (-). I am good, you are bad. This is a point of view of superiority, arrogance, snobbery. It can form in child-centric families, when the child sees that everything is being done for him and for his sake. In transactional theory, this position is interpreted as a dead end: if I am the best, then who should I follow, who should I learn from, whose words should I listen to?

I, you (-). I am bad, you are bad. This is an attitude of hopelessness, which may underlie self-aggression and be the cause of suicidal behavior. It is often formed in families at risk, where the child feels abandoned, unwanted, and the parents’ behavior does not correspond to social norms.

I (+) – You (+). I am good, you are good. This is the position of a healthy, socially mature person, which reflects a decent life, a positive outlook on the situation, and faith in success.

Tripartite positions include the components I, You and They.

I (+), You (+), They (+). In a democratic society, this position can be taken by entire families. It can be considered an ideal. Slogan: “We love everyone!”

I (+), You (+), They (-). This position is biased, as a rule, it is occupied by a talker, a snob or a bully. Slogan: “I don’t care about them!”

I (+), You (-), They (+). This is the attitude of a dissatisfied person, such as a missionary: “You are not as good as those.”

I (+), You (-), They (-). This is the position of a critical person who looks down on everyone: “Everyone must bow before me and be like me.”

I (-), You (+), They (+). The position of a self-deprecating person, a saint or a masochist. Slogan: “I am the worst in this world!”

I (-), You (+), They (-). The position of a sycophant is when a person does this not out of necessity, but out of snobbery: “I grovel, and the reward awaits me, not those people.”

I (-), You (-), They (+). The position of obsequious envy or political action: “They don’t like us because we are worse than them.”

I (-), You (-), They (-). The position of pessimists and cynics, those who are sure: “In our time there are no good people.”

Positions are closely related to life scenarios and often influence the nature of games.

Self-test questions:

Describe the interaction structure.

What socio-psychological phenomena can arise in the process of interaction?

What interaction strategies did K. Thomas describe?

What are the functions of conflict?

What psychoanalytic theories of interaction do you know?

List aspects of social role.

What ego states did E. Bern identify?

Name the types of transactions.

What areas of interaction did R. Bales identify?

List the principles of social interaction formulated by J. Homans?

A person (personality) is determined by the requirements and expectations of society. Therefore, she has a set of roles and ways of behavior. They determine her status. External behavior does not depend on the inner world of a person. The uniqueness of a person, his activity, and inner world are ignored.

Charles Cooley(1864-1929) – am. sociologist. Interactionism.

In the formation of social processes, the decisive role belongs to human consciousness, the ability to distinguish oneself from a group, to create one’s own self.

The human self includes:

1. how I introduce myself to others (present myself)

2. how I am perceived by others (how I appear to another person and how this other person evaluates my image)

3. the ensuing feeling of I, like pride and humiliation.

Other people are mirrors that help shape each person’s own image.

The theory is called the mirror self theory.

George Herbert Mead(1863-1931) - American sociologist who made the greatest contribution to the theory of symbolic interactionism.

Social interaction is communication carried out through social symbols (language, gestures, cultural symbols, etc.).

There are two types of symbols:

1. insignificant - symbols (gestures) that cause reactions in which there is no thought (instinctive acts - covering the face from a blow);

2. significant – symbols (gestures) unique to humans, cause predictable reactions, and allow meaningful actions to be taken.

Meaningful symbols are contained primarily in language.

In the process of interaction, people must interpret the meanings and intentions of others, which is why they take on a role.

The central concept of symbolic interactionism is "self"(self) - “I myself.” The self is the ability of people to imagine themselves as the object of their own thoughts. Develops through process accepting the role in the process of social contacts.

Taking a role is the ability to mentally put yourself in the place of another person in communication, to understand his intentions. Human communication is a constant process of interpretation by taking on the role of another.

Self-formation has two aspects:

1. “I” (“I”) – an individual’s spontaneous internal representation of himself.

2. “I and others” (“Me”) is a set of attitudes, norms and values ​​of others adopted in society.

The result of reflection is the individual’s ability to understand how he is perceived and assessed by others; influence of social groups on personality.

The attitude of the entire community is the attitude of the “generalized Other.”

Through the “generalized Other” the influence is exerted on the “Me” subsystem; “Me” exercises control over “I”.

There are many “generalized Others” in society; the subject chooses significant others from among them, thereby not only assimilating, but also rejecting the attitudes of others.

In turn, the social “I” is a source of social change: it deviates from social expectations, introduces changes into interaction that transform the overall content of the social process.

According to Mead, in traditional (earlier) societies the subsystem “Me” predominates, in modern societies – “I”.

In domestic science, the concepts are actively used interiorization external (social) experience (L.S. Vygotsky), appropriation (A.N. Leontiev).

B.D. Parygin distinguished between narrow and broad aspects of socialization.

In a narrow sense, socialization is nothing more than the process of entering a social environment and adapting to it.

In a broad sense - as a historical process, phylogeny.

G.M.’s remark is valuable. Andreeva about what is between socialization and education there are no significant differences. There is one important distinguishing aspect.

Under education It is generally accepted to understand the process of targeted social influence on an individual.

Socialization– a largely spontaneous, not always conscious process.

The most important mechanism for assigning settings is conformism- exposure of individuals to group pressure, submission to it; appropriation and change of values, behavior under the influence of others.

Levels of conformity:

1) at the level of suggestibility - the involuntary compliance of the individual to the opinion of the group;

2) at the level of conscious compliance with the majority in the name of avoiding conflict (as an internal, learned reaction or as an external demonstrative agreement with the group).

The main reasons for conformity are:

Human needs to belong to a group

In social approval,

In the opportunity to enjoy the benefits that group membership provides,

To avoid conflict situations when deviating from the norm.

We will not exclude the influence of the phenomenon on the formation of values nonconformism- refutation of the group’s opinion as a negative subordination to the same group.

And also the true opposite of conformism - positions of self-determination- the selective attitude of an individual to the influences of a group, in which, based on a rational comparison of information with beliefs and goals, a person makes an independent decision.

In the process of socialization, we can distinguish the most characteristic stages:

1) stage of subordination - attitudes are formed under the influence of public opinion (close family environment, more distant contact groups) on the basis of a positive assessment as a factor that reinforces and fixes elementary moral ideas;

2) identification stage - behavior is controlled by conscience, a sense of duty, external influences are not excluded;

3) the stage of internalization - the emergence of stable internal positions, motives, moral feelings as a special form of manifestation of moral needs.

It should be noted that the stages are interconnected, especially since several installations can simultaneously be in the assignment stages.

A stage of individualization of attitudes is possible, when the perceived ones are subjected to deeper analysis and comparison with others; further systematization, processing taking into account the developing ideals of the subject.

The process of socialization is carried out through a variety of social institutions in different forms and types of communication.

Socialization is carried out in various forms of communication: mass, group, interpersonal, informal, business, through the media, as the impact of culture as a whole.

Agents, institutions of socialization: political, economic, social (family, school, informal groups, official organizations).

In addition to the theory discussed above by R. Bales, there are others that explain the internal mechanisms of interpersonal interaction. The most popular in psychology are: exchange theory, psychoanalytic approach, impression management theory, and the concept of symbolic interactionism.

J. Homans, the author of exchange theory, believes that people interact with each other based on their experience, weighing possible rewards and costs. According to this theory, each of us strives to balance rewards and costs to make our interactions sustainable and enjoyable; A person’s current behavior is determined by whether and how his actions were rewarded in the past. This theory is based on four principles:

the more a certain type of behavior is rewarded, the more often it will be repeated;

if the reward for certain types of behavior depends on certain conditions, the person strives to recreate these conditions;

if the reward is large, a person is willing to expend more effort to obtain it;

When a person's needs are close to saturation, he is less willing to make efforts to satisfy them.

According to Homans, with the help of his theory, various complex types of interaction can be described: power relations, negotiation process, leadership, etc. He views social interaction as a complex system of exchanges determined by ways of balancing rewards and costs.

Such interaction is generally more than a simple exchange of rewards, and people's reactions to rewards are not always determined by a linear relationship like stimulus => response; high rewards can lead to loss of activity, etc.

The psychoanalytic approach is also popular. Z. Freud believed that interpersonal interaction is determined mainly by ideas acquired in early childhood and conflicts experienced during this period of life. Thus, according to psychoanalytic theory, in the process of interaction people simply replicate and reproduce childhood experiences. 3. Freud believed that the formation of groups and their attraction for people lies in the fact that they experience a sense of devotion and obedience to the group leaders. This is explained, according to Freud, not so much by the personal qualities of leaders, but by the fact that we identify them with powerful personalities, which our parents personified in childhood. In such situations, we seem to return to earlier stages of our development. This regression occurs mainly in situations where interaction is informal or disorganized. Research shows that the absence of specific expectations increases the power of group leaders.

The basis of E. Goffman's approach, which is called impression management theory, is the assumption that situations of social interaction resemble dramatic performances in which people, like actors, strive to create and maintain favorable impressions. To display and express symbolic meaning through which one can make a good impression on others; people prepare and create appropriate situations themselves. According to Goffman, social situations should be viewed as dramatic performances in miniature: people behave like actors on stage, using “scenery” and “environment” to create a certain impression on others about themselves, Goffman writes: “Despite a certain purpose that The individual mentally sets 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 mainly through its influence on others' understanding of the situation; he acts in such a way as to produce the impression he needs on people, under the influence of which others will independently do what corresponds to his own plans.” This concept is also called the theory of social dramaturgy.

The interactive side of communication was studied in most detail in the works of representatives of symbolic interactionism (J. Mead, G. Bloomer), who believe that people’s behavior in relation to each other and the objects of the surrounding world is determined by the meaning that they attach to them.

J. Mead considered human actions as social behavior based on the exchange of information. He believed that people react not only to the actions of other people, but also to their intentions. We can “unravel” other people's intentions by analyzing their actions and considering our past experiences in similar situations. In this regard, Mead identified two types of actions in interaction: 1) an insignificant gesture (represents an automatic reflex such as blinking); 2) a significant gesture (associated with understanding the actions and intentions of another person). In the second case, a person needs to put himself in the place of another person or, in Mead’s words, “take the role of another.” This process is complex, but we are able to carry it out because from childhood we are taught to attach meaning to certain objects, actions and events. When we attribute meaning to something, it becomes a symbol, that is, a concept, action or object that expresses the meaning of another concept, action or object.

The essence of the concept of symbolic interactionism is that interaction between people is considered as a continuous dialogue, during which they observe, comprehend each other's intentions and react to them. The interpretation of a stimulus occurs in the time interval between the impact of the stimulus and our response. At this time, we associate the stimulus with a symbol, on the basis of which the response is determined.

To some extent, everything is symbols, but of these, words are the most important symbols, since with their help we give meaning to objects that would otherwise remain meaningless. Thanks to this, we can communicate with other people. Such communication is due to the fact that society teaches its members to understand certain symbols in the same way. Personality is formed in interaction with other individuals, and the mechanism of this formation is the establishment of control over the actions of the individual and the ideas about him that others develop.

Symbolic interactionism provides a more realistic view of human interaction than exchange theory, but it focuses primarily on the subjective aspects of interaction that are individual to each individual. This concept also places too much emphasis on the symbolic aspects of interaction, distracting from its content.

Let us note that, despite the variety of approaches to the problem of interaction, not a single theory ignores such concepts as norm, social control, social role. The following sections will be devoted to them.

“The whole world is a theater, in it there are women, men - all actors. And everyone plays more than one role” (W. Shakespeare). As a person becomes, grows, and turns into a social “microcosm,” he is included in many groups, unique public spaces, in each of which communication is reproduced on the basis of its own language, its own internal symbolism. Wanting to be understood and accepted, a person must master these symbols. Moreover, as communication becomes more complex, the symbolism becomes more and more cumbersome, the internal discipline or “charter” of the role becomes more and more strict.

The analysis of these processes has been formalized in modern sociology in role theory, which allows us to consider the formation, maintenance and transformation of a person’s compliance with social requirements. It is through the concept of “role” that the way of giving a person a form, or rather, forms, is reflected in sociology. Roles are set and suggested by typical patterns of action and reinforce a certain identity.

Role theory acts in sociology as “a tool for a shorthand report on various types of social activities” (P. Berger) and, at the same time, as a way of seeing a person as a collection of these types, identities, persons. Its heuristic, explanatory value is undeniable. And at the same time, it is capable of exerting a manipulating influence, postulating social fatalism and thereby justifying individual irresponsibility. Moreover, here we are not talking about the “early sociological” vision of the first half of the 19th century - for example, about the social role of the proletarian or bourgeois in K. Marx. Already in the second half of the 20th century in sociology - especially in symbolic interactionism - there was a growing desire to exclude the role of his individual drives, needs, interests when explaining human behavior, and to consider all the diverse connections of a person with things, nature, other people, groups of people and society as a whole as connections mediated by role signs and symbols. Symbolic interactionism is based on the idea of ​​social activity as a set of social roles, which is fixed in a system of linguistic and other symbols. When entering into interaction, each individual has an idea of ​​how this interaction will or should proceed.

As a result, an extremely relativistic vision of man is formed: “From a sociological point of view, a social personality is not some stable given entity that moves from one situation to another. It is rather a process of constant generation and rebirth in every social situation - a process tied together by the thin thread of memory."

This vision is opposed by another, which considers the individual as a stable, qualitatively defined social subject, formed not as a bearer of private, partial, indifferent fragments of activities, but as the main representative of the social, by which one can judge the essence of social life. This is emphasized by T. Adorno, who disagrees with the definition of education as just adaptation. Unthinkable without the moment of adaptation, it is focused on developing in the individual “resistance to transformations of the substantial”, to mutations of the essence of social life.

In the structure of a personality performing various roles, a core, or deep “I,” stands out. This deep “I” (N.A. Berdyaev) allows a person to preserve himself within many social spaces, in different forms of activity: in the world of everyday life, in the spaces of religious, scientific, artistic, economic life, etc. Despite role radicalism and the pluralism of individual manifestations, the idea of ​​the unique originality of the individual is preserved, which is significant for itself and for society precisely because of its integrity and stability: “And yet the soul,” writes G. Simmel, “has a sense of being-for-itself, independent of all these interweavings and involvements, logically designated by such a dubious concept of freedom.”

As confirmation that the latter approach more adequately reflects social reality, one can also consider the conclusions that arise in connection with the analysis of the level of role performance. Such an analysis shows that this level is one, common to all roles performed in society by one person. Just as an actress in the theater, seeing and embodying Chekhov’s The Seagull and Shakespeare’s Ophelia in different ways on stage, plays these roles at the same level of skill, so does the individual in social everyday life she performs her various roles no higher and no lower than the level determined by the level of development, the richness of her deep “I”.

This does not mean that personality roles are always harmoniously combined. On the contrary, in sociology it is studied as a frequently perceived situation of role conflict - an intrapersonal contradiction that arises when it is impossible to combine the actions that the sequential performance of his different roles requires from a person. We are talking here, first of all, about a qualitative mismatch of roles. For example, it is extremely difficult for one person to simultaneously fulfill the role of an activist in the movement for complete independence of Quebec from Canada (which, most likely, is deeply connected with his role as a good family man, a neighbor, historically rooted in his civic identity) and the role of a successful businessman, which not only requires the development of contacts and a defining desire for definition, blurring boundaries, but perhaps turning his life into an “airplane” existence, excluding any forms of civic responsibility assumed by the first role.

However, in the conditions of intensification of social life, the problem of incompatibility of the volumes of activity of the individual playing his most important roles is also becoming increasingly acute. For example, the desire to fulfill equally well their roles as a daughter of elderly parents, a mother and a working woman can and often today brings a person to a state of crisis - due to the fact that the demands of these roles are not combined quantitatively. Here, the total volume of events that require the participation (not only physical, but also spiritual) of a woman often simply does not fit into her chronotope (time-space).

Role conflict allows us to see roles not only as opportunities, fields of social practices, but also as limitations, boundaries of these practices. Role theory shows how deeply connected and inseparable the processes of personality formation and self-realization are.

role theory) - approaches in sociology that emphasize the importance of roles, as well as "role taking" in the formation and maintenance of social order and social organization. See Role.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

ROLE THEORY

a concept that arose to explain the relationship between an individual and society. Formation of T.r. associated with the names of J. Mead, R. Linton, J. (J.) Moreno. In T.r. Three levels of analysis can be distinguished: sociological, where the role is considered primarily as an element of social. structures and cultures; social-psychological social level the interaction of individuals among themselves, the individual and the group, where the role turns out to be a set of common meanings, without which communication is unthinkable; finally, the role can be considered at the level of the individual as a system. Her research combines the interests of general psychology, social science. psychology and sociology. In this case, the emphasis is on the personal interpretation of the role and the influence of the role on the individual. There are different approaches to T.r. In symbolic interactionism, developed by Mead, society is considered as a system of communication, actions, which are social. insofar as they have a common goal and use common meanings-symbols developed in the process of interaction. The individual is included in the interaction and becomes social. a being to the extent that he learns to “take the role of another,” that is, to master general meanings, anticipate the reaction of another to his actions, puts himself in his place and thereby becomes an object for himself. Role learning begins in childhood, first in unorganized games, then in games according to the rules. The personality of an individual is the unity of two “I”: social, which is the result of mastering different things. roles, internalized attitudes of other people and deep - individual, spontaneous. Remaining in my analysis of the role mainly on the social-psychological. level, Mead, however, introduces the concept of the “generalized “Other”, meaning the collective prescriptions of the group for the behavior of the individual. Linton analyzes roles and statuses based on the sociological view. In the system of society, he identified statuses - positions in the structure of the social. relationships and the associated sets of rights and responsibilities. He defines a role as a dynamic aspect of status, without explaining how a role differs from “playing a role.” The main thing for Linton is the understanding of roles as instructions coming from society, standards of behavior, cultural models. Therefore, the role as a dynamic aspect of status is more correctly understood as its functional, cultural aspect, but in this case it is a set of rights and obligations, the fulfillment of which is expected by society. Hence the need to clarify the concept of status, which was later replaced by the more neutral term “position” as a place in the system of relations; status retained the meaning of rank and prestige. The founder of sociometry, Moreno, considered the roles of Ch. arr. in practice part of his teaching - psychotherapy. The methods of psycho- and sociodrama he developed involved playing dramatic characters. roles, but not prescribed, but freely invented in the course of action. This “teaching spontaneity” was, according to Moreno, supposed to cure individuals from social-psychic. diseases, help resolve life's difficulties. The role is not devoid of social and cultural content, but social. and the individual are merged in it. Moreno emphasizes the conflict between the self and official roles. Large group of social psychologists and sociologists developing TR consists of those who in one way or another gravitate towards one of the three levels of analysis mentioned above. Accordingly, the range of categories with which the authors operate changes. The most significant group includes representatives of social-psychological. approach to role analysis (I. Goffman, T. Newcome, J. Stetzel). Some of them trace the formation of roles from interaction in unorganized groups and their transformation into institutionalized roles that acquire a normative and coercive character. Important categories of T.r. with this approach are “role behavior”, “action in role”, communication, consent. With general sociological t.zr. reviews roles T. Parsons; For him, the interaction of two people is an example of social interaction. interactions on a community scale, and the role is behavior that is normatively regulated on the basis of generally accepted values, a social component. structures. However, the most general concepts of TR. at different levels of analysis are “role”, “role behavior”, “position” (status), “instruction” or “expectation”, requirement." The same principle is implemented by R. Darendorf, emphasizing the impersonal and external to the individual nature of the prescribed role , its normativity. Lit.: Shibutani T. Social psychology. M., 1969; Role. Camb., 1972; Role theory: concepts and research. Huntington, 1979. E. M. Korzheva.