Abstract
In his seminal works on interaction ritual chains (IRCs), Randall Collins (2004) presented a set of new ideas to guide research on interaction. Synthesizing Goffman’s theory of interaction rituals in everyday life and Durkheim’s theory of interaction during sacred religious rituals, he developed a theory for analyzing entrained interaction centered around objects of veneration within small groups. Whether studying a group of engineers designing a self-driving automobile or secret gatherings of white supremacists centered around confederate flags or other symbols, the field researcher senses the value of this theory for conceptualizing the rituals of interaction in small groups. Collins proposes that interaction rituals evoke identities in the participants, reverence toward their shared heroes and symbols, and antagonism toward their shared enemies and, when successful, stimulate solidarity within the groups and confidence and motivation to succeed within members. Conversely, rituals fail by either falling flat or by alienating their participants, leaving them either less energized and confident than before they engaged in them or even depressed.
The goal of the timely volume Ritual, Emotion, Violence: Studies on the Micro-Sociology of Randall Collins, edited by Elliott B. Weininger, Annette Lareau, and Omar Lizardo, is to present a set of studies by notable scholars that apply Collins’s theory to three important issues: violence, solidarity, and creativity. Their general aim is to theoretically and methodologically push Collins’s work forward. The anthology begins with a short, elegant introduction to Collins’s theory and then considers how each chapter is relevant to the three areas of research listed above.
Following his general IRC theory, Collins argues that humans are not evolutionarily wired to carry out violence and that when they do, emotional domination precedes physical attack. This argument is presented in his book Violence: A Micro-Sociological Theory (2008), along with a series of articles. Several questions arise from Collins’s thesis: first, which kind of interactional dynamics related to specific situations lead to violence and, once the dynamics begin, how is it that violence either erupts or aborts? Second, how does a small subset of individuals become proficient at violence despite confrontational tension and fear?
In Part One of this book we find two vivid ethnographic chapters making use of Collins’s concept of “forward panics”—a sequential dynamic wherein tension between two parties shifts, as one assumes staggering superiority over the other through an emotional process that leads to a decisive advantage when attacking the opponent. For the opponent, becoming emotionally weak determines the outcome more than physical weakness. Randol Contreras uses the theory to examine interactions leading to inner-city violence in the Bronx. He proposes that episodes of violence occur after a preliminary interaction ritual of emotional escalation. In line with Collins’s perspective, escalation rituals are carried out by elite specialists who are capable of emotionally dominating their opponents before they strike by carefully reading their behavior. This is indeed a rich illustration of the theory.
In a subsequent chapter, Philippe Bourgois, Laurie Kain Hart, Fernando Montero, and George Karandinos present an ambitious team ethnography analyzing street violence within drug markets led by Puerto Ricans. Extending Collins’s focal point on encounters, they examine how public policy and socio-economic conditions contribute to violent confrontations. In their view, Collins’s lens for studying violence needs to widen to include socio-structural factors. Socio-structural factors may not be physically co-present during interactions, but they impinge on these encounters nonetheless (e.g., the availability of guns, the unavailability of blue-collar jobs, and the overcrowding of jail cells). The authors assert that Collins’s focus on interactions that takes place in the moment misses the fact that “Violence is . . . distributed unequally across social contexts” (p. 48). These contexts are embedded within historical contingencies that have either emotionally charged or blunted actors’ energy.
As formulated in Interaction Ritual Chains (2004), Collins’s ritual model entails bodily presence, just as Goffman holds that actors track one another and make themselves trackable when in co-presence regardless of anything eventful happening. Evolutionary theory also argues that humans as animals have evolved with nervous systems monitoring each other’s behavior (2004:54). Bodily presence—and, paraphrasing Peter Baehr (2005), bodies at work—amplifies the effectiveness of rituals, and without it many of the microdetails of experience are lost and mutual attunement is impoverished. As Collins puts it in the last chapter of this edited volume: “full-body co-presence is multi-channel” (p. 257). In short, co-presence enhances and heightens mutual focus, which is a key ingredient for a successful interaction. Despite digitalization, sport or rock fans still attend games and shows, and political, business, or scholarly groups assemble periodically in specific places. Physical places still matter a great deal. According to Collins, regardless of the improvement of electronic communication, computer-mediated face-to-face gatherings will not, at least in the near future, fully replace bodily presence. As Robert Freed Bales (1950) put it, we have a small group, and thus a certain degree of solidarity, when at a later point in time each member can provide a distinct account of one another. In spite of these considerations, many pressing questions concerning digital communication remain. For example: Can elements of IRC theory apply to online communication, even if only to a partial extent? Does mediated communication lead to the development of conventions similar to those observed in face-to-face rituals and thus produce similar levels of reciprocal entrainment and emotional energy?
In Part Two, Paul DiMaggio, Clark Bernier, Charles Heckscher, and David Mimno are perhaps the first scholars to seriously tackle these questions through a massive project. They carried out a quantitative study of two internal corporate online discussions held over two years between IBM employees addressing the company’s values and strategies. Part of their aim was to test which kinds of posts are more or less likely to induce responses and therefore to support perseverance of a discussion thread. Surprisingly, their findings support the prediction of IRC theory that focus, speed of response (and thus its rhythm), and entrainment will be associated with persistent discussion threads (their dependent variable), and thus support the idea that IRC is partly applicable to situations in which actors are not co-present.
Building on Collins’s magisterial work on eminence in world philosophy, Simone Polillo analyzes interaction in two creative networks in two different fields guided by two theories of creativity in groups: Collins’s IRC, presented in The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, and Ronald Burt’s theory of structural holes. Polillo’s findings reveal interesting insights on how the structure of financial economics and learning, speech, and hearing research affect intellectual recognition. Because these two fields are differently organized, the way to acquire reputation within them also differs. Methodologically sound, this chapter will spark new research within the blossoming sociology of creativity.
In Part Three, Jonathan Turner argues that focusing exclusively on rituals “in moment-by-moment” interactions while largely neglecting structural and cultural contexts provides an incomplete view of interpersonal dynamics. Like Bourgois and coauthors, he contends that Collins’s model needs to be expanded, that his work may indeed be too micro-sociological, and that its overall promise may be too ambitious. Turner’s chapter includes dense and exciting theorizing.
David Gibson’s chapter analyzes the micro-foundations of decisions leading to macro-level violence. Specifically, he examines interactions in four situations that led to state-sponsored violence: (1) a telephone conference call including U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson that led to the decision to retaliate against North Vietnam; (2) Saddam Hussein’s discussions with his advisers prior to the invasion of Iran; (3) the meeting of the Polish Politburo imposing martial law in Poland; and (4) the deliberations of the Standing Committee of the Chinese Politburo during the student protests preceding martial law and the Tiananmen Square massacre. This piece is theoretically and methodologically original, providing an inspiring example of how to effectively use audio data to uncover turning points in fateful situations. It includes a direct, yet friendly intellectual confrontation with Collins’s theory. Broadly, Gibson argues that not all forms of talk—including the highly consequential interactions carried out by world leaders—follow the emotional logic of IRCs. Historical contingencies also matter, along with the values of the decision-makers and how they frame political issues. This chapter will appeal to a broad audience.
To explain involvement in situations and how it is dependent on perception, Erika Summers-Effler and Justin Van Ness draw on cognitive science to critique Collins’s theory of the focus of attention during interaction rituals. Their overall suggestion is that cognitive science has much to teach us about factors that influence attention. This highly creative chapter will generate much cross-disciplinary research in the near future.
And in Part Four, Collins himself looks back at what micro-sociology has achieved and provides a number of fruitful ideas for how it will thrive. One example among the many that he highlights is Anne Nassauer’s work (2019) on demonstrations and “situational breakdowns.'' Nassauer analyzes video data from CCTV cameras and mobile phone recordings along with ethnographic data to uncover general turning points between smoothness and chaos regardless of ideologies or protesters’ declared intentions. Relatedly, Collins believes that micro-sociological theory will increasingly be used to identify pivotal points that could deflate violent confrontations, and it will also be adopted in training programs for law enforcement officers to monitor and control one’s emotions. Further, micro-sociology will contribute to the implementation of artificial intelligence, and it will benefit from the use of new technologies. (See also Parker, Cardenas, Dorr, and Hackett [2018] on how sociometers can be used to research rhythmic entrainment, emotional energy, and solidarity.
This timely, well-written, and well-organized volume is a welcome addition to studies of micro-sociology. While diverse in methodologies, each study is based on strong data, and each makes use of sophisticated research designs. Together, they will serve as a springboard to those interested in continuing developing micro-sociology. Selected chapters will also be useful in undergraduate and graduate classes on deviance, micro-sociology, and modern sociological theory. And, as the authors note, these studies will certainly not exhaust the wealth of ideas with which Collins has gifted us.