<P> Symbolic interactionists are often criticized for being overly impressionistic in their research methods and somewhat unsystematic in their theories . It is argued that the theory is not one theory, but rather, the framework for many different theories . Additionally, some theorists have a problem with symbolic interaction theory due to its lack of testability . These objections, combined with the fairly narrow focus of interactionist research on small - group interactions and other social psychological issues, have relegated the interactionist camp to a minority position among sociologists (albeit a fairly substantial minority). Much of this criticism arose during the 1970s in the U.S. when quantitative approaches to sociology were dominant . Perhaps the best known of these is by Alvin Gouldner . </P> <P> Some critiques of symbolic interactionism are based on the assumption that it is a theory, and the critiques apply the criteria for a "good" theory to something that does not claim to be a theory . Some critics find the symbolic interactionist framework too broad and general when they are seeking specific theories . Symbolic interactionism is a theoretical framework rather than a theory (see Stryker and Vryan, 2003, for a clear distinction between the two as it pertains to interactionist - inspired conceptualizations) can be assessed on the basis of effective conceptualizations . The theoretical framework, as with any theoretical framework, is vague when it comes to analyzing empirical data or predicting outcomes in social life . As a framework rather than a theory, many scholars find it difficult to use . Interactionism being a framework rather than a theory makes it impossible to test interactionism in the manner that a specific theoretical claim about the relationship between specific variables in a given context allows . Unlike the symbolic interactionist framework, the many theories derived from symbolic interactionism, such as role theory and the versions of Identity Theory developed by Stryker, and Burke and colleagues, clearly define concepts and the relationships between them in a given context, thus allowing for the opportunity to develop and test hypotheses . Further, especially among Blumerian processual interactionists, a great number of very useful conceptualizations have been developed and applied in a very wide range of social contexts, types of populations, types of behaviors, and cultures and subcultures . </P> <P> Symbolic interactionism is often related and connected with social structure . This concept suggests that symbolic interactionism is a construction of people's social reality . It also implies that from a realistic point of view, the interpretations that are being made will not make much difference . When the reality of a situation is defined, the situation becomes a meaningful reality . This includes methodological criticisms, and critical sociological issues . A number of symbolic interactionists have addressed these topics, the best known being Sheldon Stryker's structural symbolic interactionism and the formulations of interactionism heavily influenced by this approach (sometimes referred to as the "Indiana School" of symbolic interactionism), including the works of key scholars in sociology and psychology using different methods and theories applying a structural version of interactionism that are represented in a 2003 collection edited by Burke et al . Another well - known structural variation of symbolic interactionism that applies quantitative methods is Manford H. Kuhn's formulation which is often referred to in sociological literature as the "Iowa School". "Negotiated order theory" also applies a structural approach . </P> <P> Language is viewed as the source of all meaning . Social constructionist Herbert Blumer illuminates several key features about social interactionism . Most people interpret things based on assignment and purpose . The interaction occurs once the meaning of something has become identified . This concept of meaning is what starts to construct the framework of social reality . By aligning social reality, Blumer suggests that language is the meaning of interaction . Communication, especially in the form of symbolic interactionism is connected with language . Language initiates all forms of communication, verbal and non-verbal . Blumer defines this source of meaning as a connection that arises out of the social interaction that people have with each other . </P>

Which of the following is a criticism of symbolic interaction theory