The Institutionalization of Symbolic Interactionism in Canadian Sociology, 1922-1979: Success at What Cost?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay examines the growth of symbolic interactionism (SI) as a specialization in English-language Canadian sociology, 1922–1979. We do not focus on theoretical and/or methodological developments. Rather, we document three empirical indicators of the institutionalization of SI: faculty members hired, research published, and SI-receptive programs established. We find that Canadian sociologists institutionalized SI in two phases. From 1922 to 1959, SI institutionalized slowly. There were few SI “core” faculty and scarcely more “SI-accommodative” faculty. Little SI-based literature was published. McGill had Canada’s only SI-friendly program. After 1960, SI grew rapidly and, by 1979, was well institutionalized: over ninety SI and SI-accommodative faculty had been hired, SI literature (journal articles, textbooks) was commonplace. Many sociology departments offered an SI-accommodative program. Sometime in the 1980s, classical SI began to “de-institutionalize.” Ironically, as SI’s footprint grew and influence spread, it appeared to become less discernable, less coherent and less viable as a distinct and unified approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".