Situating Frames and Institutional Logics: The Social Situation as a Key Institutional MicroFoundation

S. Furnari
{"title":"Situating Frames and Institutional Logics: The Social Situation as a Key Institutional MicroFoundation","authors":"S. Furnari","doi":"10.1108/s0733-558x2019000065b015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research on institutional logics has highlighted the importance of social situations but has not theorized such situations in a way that takes into account their inherent richness, complexity, and unpredictability. Without a theory of social situations, the connection between logics and people’s everyday life experience is incomplete, resulting in fragile microfoundations. Building on Goffman (1974) and the institutional logics perspective, in this essay I sketch an institutional theory of social situations, distinguishing two components of these situations: situational experience and situated interactions. Situational experience is constituted by situational frames – that is, schemas by which a person can perceive others and interpret the source of their agency in a situation. Multiple situational frames are simultaneously present in any situation, offering various potentials for action. Institutional logics shape the content that situational frames take in different institutional orders, providing rules for interacting appropriately in typified situations. However, the actual interactions unfolding in a given social situation do not necessarily conform to situational frames, but rather can transform those frames in unpredictable ways through interaction rituals and frame keyings. I contrast this situated perspective with the cognitivist notion that people “activate” or re-combine pre-existing aspects of logics depending on the situation. I argue that a situated perspective better accounts for the generative and transformative potential of micro-interactions.","PeriodicalId":137632,"journal":{"name":"Microfoundations of Institutions","volume":"32 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microfoundations of Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/s0733-558x2019000065b015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Research on institutional logics has highlighted the importance of social situations but has not theorized such situations in a way that takes into account their inherent richness, complexity, and unpredictability. Without a theory of social situations, the connection between logics and people’s everyday life experience is incomplete, resulting in fragile microfoundations. Building on Goffman (1974) and the institutional logics perspective, in this essay I sketch an institutional theory of social situations, distinguishing two components of these situations: situational experience and situated interactions. Situational experience is constituted by situational frames – that is, schemas by which a person can perceive others and interpret the source of their agency in a situation. Multiple situational frames are simultaneously present in any situation, offering various potentials for action. Institutional logics shape the content that situational frames take in different institutional orders, providing rules for interacting appropriately in typified situations. However, the actual interactions unfolding in a given social situation do not necessarily conform to situational frames, but rather can transform those frames in unpredictable ways through interaction rituals and frame keyings. I contrast this situated perspective with the cognitivist notion that people “activate” or re-combine pre-existing aspects of logics depending on the situation. I argue that a situated perspective better accounts for the generative and transformative potential of micro-interactions.
情境框架与制度逻辑:作为制度微观基础的社会情境
制度逻辑的研究强调了社会情境的重要性,但并没有以一种考虑到其固有的丰富性、复杂性和不可预测性的方式将这些情境理论化。没有社会情境理论,逻辑与人们日常生活经验之间的联系是不完整的,导致微观基础脆弱。在戈夫曼(1974)和制度逻辑视角的基础上,本文概述了社会情境的制度理论,区分了这些情境的两个组成部分:情境体验和情境互动。情境体验是由情境框架构成的,也就是说,一个人可以通过图式来感知他人,并解释他们在情境中的代理来源。多种情境框架同时存在于任何情境中,为行动提供了各种可能性。制度逻辑塑造情境框架在不同制度秩序下的内容,为在典型情境中适当互动提供规则。然而,在给定的社会情境中展开的实际互动并不一定符合情境框架,而是可以通过互动仪式和框架键合以不可预测的方式改变这些框架。我将这种情境视角与认知主义观点进行对比,认知主义观点认为,人们会根据情境“激活”或重新组合已有的逻辑方面。我认为,情境视角能更好地解释微互动的生成和变革潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信