Role distance
In sociology (and especially in the symbolic interactionism of Erving Goffman ), role distance describes the ability to perceive norms or role expectations , to interpret them and to deal with them in a reflective way in such a way that one's own needs can be brought into the action. And thus to stand in an ambivalent , critical or doubtful relationship to the role you have assumed.
Six forms of role distance
- Distancing yourself from what is happening by shifting to another level of reality
- Distancing yourself by no longer getting involved and taking back your commitment
- Distancing yourself through irony, jokes, and humor
- Distancing by exchanging signals between two reference groups on different "channels" at the same time
- Distancing yourself by "saving" (evading) another role
- Distancing by overemphasizing the role of behavior
The ability to distance roles depends on the type and degree of internalization of norms.
Three types of characters
- The conventional character type has rigidly internalized the norms, ie they were rigidly imposed on him in the course of the socialization process. The result is that he tries in all interactions to meet the role expectations at all costs (compulsive character, neurotic)
- The externalized character type who has not internalized norms at all (he has no conscience in the sense of an internal control authority: rather his behavior is determined by external authorities, i.e. he only acts in accordance with the norms if he is afraid of punishment or hope of reward) .
- The humanistic character type, like the conventional type, has internalized the norms, but in contrast to these, not so rigid, so that before they are applied, they examine their impact on the interests and feelings of all those involved and then, if necessary, distance themselves from their application.
Role distance according to Goffman
Goffman's concept of role distance means a separation or demarcation of the individual from the role he plays. This separation is thus - regardless of whether it is intended or not - brought about by the role behavior of the individual himself and can take on different dimensions.
Origin and core of the role distance
According to Goffman, what differentiates taking role distance from conventional role behavior? Role distance exists where the role of an individual is not grasped by him. The comprehension of a role includes the connection to the role as well as the demonstration of the qualification and the use of physical and mental abilities to play it adequately. In this process the individual becomes one with his role, so to speak absorbed in it, and, as Goffman describes it, accepts the self completely. In essence, for the concept of role distance in Goffman, this means the distancing of the individual from the role and the denial of the self:
"The individual is actually not denying the role, but rather the factual self contained in the role for other performers who accept the role."
Role distance can now be of different types and can also be achieved in different ways, which in turn illustrates the different reasons for such action.
Functions of the role distance
As shown, Hillmann emphasizes the ambivalent attitude of the individual towards the role for Goffman. The reason for this can be the rejection of the role or the belief that it is not adequate for yourself. If, for example, a bystander gets into the ranks of a march, he / she can distance himself / herself from the role of the demonstrator into which he / she is being pushed through excessively passive behavior and observation. The atheist church-goer feels the same way: Excessive boredom during the service shows that the individual clearly distances himself from the role of the believing church-goer.
This is a distancing from the role in the negative sense, although this does not always have to be the case. Role distance can also have a positive effect, and the present system of action can have a supportive and sustaining effect. Goffman shows this with the example of a medical operation: As long as the chief surgeon detaches himself a little from his role and does not immediately punish every inaccuracy of the assistant doctors, but instead draws their attention to them in a tone that is unusual for the role of the chief surgeon, he motivates his employees in terms of the operation. This in turn brings the chief surgeon closer to his job of leading the team and bringing the operation to the best possible outcome. In this way, role distance can also be seen as a serious instrument with which people maintain various systems of action and thus parts of social reality every day.
Inclusion in role theory
According to Goffman, the phenomenon of role distance is a way to distance oneself from one's own behavior. The term thus connects to the explanation and the apology, two types of separation of the individual from his own actions. Furthermore, the role distance is a useful instrument for recording behavior that lies between the prescribed role expectations and the actual role behavior and is therefore difficult to grasp analytically.
Individual evidence
- ^ Karl-Heinz Hillmann : Dictionary of Sociology (= Kröner's pocket edition . Volume 410). 4th, revised and expanded edition. Kröner, Stuttgart 1994, ISBN 3-520-41004-4 , p. 744.
- ↑ on the character types: ML Hoffman: Review of child development research . Volume 1, Russell Sage Foundation, New York 1964.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, p. 121.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, p. 120.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, p. 121.
- ^ Hillmann: Dictionary of Sociology. 1994, p. 744.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, pp. 123, 125.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, pp. 135-149.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, p. 117f.
- ^ Goffman: Interaction. 1973, p. 129f.
literature
- Erving Goffman: Interaction: Fun in the game - role distance . Piper & Co Verlag, Munich 1973, ISBN 3-492-00362-1 .