1993-Sociological Inquiry
-
Upload
blythe-tom -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 1993-Sociological Inquiry
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
1/19
Marking
Time *
Judith
A,
Howard and Jocelyn
A.
Hollander
University
of
Washington
The authors argue that temporality is
a
significant dimension of social activity.
The paper reviews the phenomenological experience of temporality, ways of concep-
tualizing time, and ways in which temporality may shape interpretation, and illustrates
these themes through an empirical study in which approximately 80 subjects read and
responded to one
of
two short stories. Themes
of
temporality were explored in the inter-
view transcripts through references to temporal themes, temporality as an influence on
causal and trait attributions, temporal chains, and other forms of interpretive cycles,
as well as ways in which temporality is involved in the definition of other and possible
others. On the basis of these patterns, we conclude that time is a crucial factor in
shaping interpretations
of
social life.
Introduction
Although much thought has been devoted to the concept of time in
disciplines such as philosophy, life sciences, and biological psychology
(McGrath 1988, pp. 9-10), relatively little attention has been paid to the
sociology
of
time. Yet time is a critical dimension
of
social life. Temporality
organizes social lives (Zerubavel 1981), plays a vital role in the understanding
of causal connections (Brickman, Ryan, and Wortman 1975; Kruglanski
1975), and fundamentally structures human experience (McGrath 1988). At
least part of the reason for the empirical neglect is pragmatic: including time
as a research parameter is often difficult and expensive. Moreover, this neglect
is self-perpetuating; because time is rarely considered, neither a methodology
nor a disciplinary consensus on the importance of time has developed.
Other barriers are more conceptual and paradigmatic. Traditional
sociology is dominated by synchronic theory, which deals only with timeless,
static snapshots of entities. This equilibrium-based research paradigm:
. . treats variation, conflict, and change as unintended and undesired
perturbations in what are looked upon as stable, harmonious, and equilibrium-
seeking adaptive systems. This static orientation . . . trivializes the temporal
features of the system under study.
. . .
(McGrath 1988, p. 8). Similarly, a
fundamental assumption of the sociological conception of general linear reality
is that the order of events does not influence their outcomes (Abbott 1988).
KennethJ Gergen (1984) takes this argument one step further, suggesting
Sociolofical Znyuiry, Vol.
63,
No. 4,
November 1993
1993 by the University of Texas
Press P.O.
Box 7819, Austin,
TX
78713
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
2/19
426 J U D I T H A . H O W A R D A N D J O C E L Y N A . H O L L A N D E R
that both the difficulty of studying the flow of social experience over time and the
presumed superiority of experimental over more naturalistic designs have
created a belief among traditional sociologists in phenomenal immutability.
Researchers have, therefore, focused on events removed from their temporal
context. Gergen contrasts this with a diachronic approach, which considers
the state of an entity across temporal periods.
To
exclude temporality as a
parameter in social analyses is to ignore a crucial dimension of social life.
In this paper the authors seek to demonstrate the importance of temporality
for one form of significant social activity, the interpretation of everyday
interaction. Time is crucial for making meaning. Time “constitute[s] one
of
the major parameters of the context on which the meaning of social acts and
situations depends” (Zerubavel 1981, pp. 101-102). In order to understand
the role of time in interpretation, it is necessary also to understand what time
itself means and how it is experienced.
A
review of relevant if diverse literature
points to the importance of temporality, outlines ways of conceptualizing time,
and suggests particular ways in which temporality may shape interpretation.
Perceiving Time
Dimensions
of
Time
There are at least three general categories of temporal order: the physio-
temporal order, the temporal patterns of the physical world; the biotemporal
order, the temporal patterns of living organisms; and the sociotemporal order,
the patterns of social life (Zerubavel 1981). Social time is largely unrelated to
physiotemporal or biotemporal patterns and cycles. While the physiotemporal
and biotemporal orders are inevitably constrained
b y
nature, according to
Eviatar Zerubavel, the sociotemporal order is ”essentially a socially constructed
artifact which rests upon arbitrary social conventions” (1981, p. xii). Socio-
temporal units are a symbolic system with no intrinsic value. These intrin-
sically meaningless constructions, however, are reified such that their impact
on human life is as real as more physical temporal constraints. The limited
research available on the sociology of time focuses on individuals’ social
constructions of this sociotemporal order, attempting to account for cultural
and individual differences in temporal orientations and perceptions, in the
experience of time and in the allocation and use of time across multiple
activities (McGrath 1988).
There are a variety of dimensions within the sociotemporal order: tem-
poral location or when events take place in time; their duration and the
allocation of time to various activities; their rates of recurrence, rhythm, or
periodicity; temporal scale, the scope of a phenomenon. Micro-level temporal
scale, for example, might include patterns
of
synchronization and sequencing
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
3/19
MARKING T I M E 427
in interaction (e. g., turntaking in conversation), whereas macro-level temporal
scale might include the temporal sequencing of events within a n organization
or role (e.g., one must pass the bar examination before practicing law, and
these days one is supposed to complete one’s Ph.D. before beginning
a
job as
an assistant professor). Temporal aspects of stages in the life course, or repe-
tition of behavior
or
events over multiple generations represent even broader
temporal scope (McGrath and Kelly 1986; McGrath 1988).
The sequencing of events, the order in which behaviors or events occur,
is a particularly important dimension. Some sequences are inevitable (e.g.,
youth must necessarily precede old age), while others are constructed
or
sym-
bolic (e.g., one claps only after the final movement of a classical symphony-
the dark looks cast at those who clap after a single movement suggests the
normative status of particular sequences). The sequencing of events plays a
critical role in understanding the causal connections between events, and thus
helps us to make sense of the world. A known temporal order, according to
McGrath andKelly, “is essential to draw a causal inference at all”(1986,p. 3).
Events are generally seen to result from a preexisting cause(s) and to be
antecedents to potential subsequent effects. Thus, events located in the past
often draw their meaning as much from their perceived consequences as from
their perceived antecedents (Brickman, Ryan, and Wortman 1975; Kelley 1983).
Another more interpersonal aspect of the sequencing of events is the
necessary synchronization
of
varying rhythms and patterns
of
time within a
single individual, between individuals and groups, or between humans and
the physical world,
a
process which McGrath and Kelly (1986) label “entrain-
ment. Much human behavior at both interpersonal and organizational levels
involves the “mutual entrainment of endogenous rhythms,” which in turn
“become entrained to arbitrary but powerful external cycles” (p. 48) such as
daylnight cycles and work schedules.
The
Social Construction and Manipllation
of ime
George Herbert Mead’s (1929, 1932) theory of the past and present is
one of the most extreme statements of the social construction of time. Mead
conceptualized experience as inherently temporal; the present always establishes
the extent and span of temporal experience. According to Mead, reality is
always the present, and events that constitute the referents of past and future
always belong to the present: “memory and anticipation build on both ends”
of the present (Mead 1932, p. 66). Because the present consists of emergent
events, and the present is thus unique, the future is always insecure. Mead’s
very conception of sociality involves an adjustment process through which
previous presents are aligned with current presents; both continuity and
change occur in the present.
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
4/19
428
JUDITH
A .
HOWARD
AND JOCELYN A. H OLLANDER
These reconstructions of time are also fundamentally social: for Mead,
time is not just an abstract category, but is social, political, cultural,
or
eco-
nomic. Time is used in the service of rational collective action and social
control (Strauss 1991).A similar functionalism is implicit in David
R.
Maines,
Noreen M. Sugrue, and Michael Katovich’s (1983) categorization of Mead’s
conception of the past. The symbolically reconstructed past (redefining the
meaning of past events so that they have meaning in and utility for the present),
the social structural past (the contexts of experience made up of sequences of
activities that condition [but do not determine the continuity with the present),
the implied objective past (the actual existence of previous events as implied
by present realities), and the mythical past (symbolic creations used to
manipulate social relationships), all are components
of
reconstructions
designed to create and maintain social advantage.
Other analysts offer more contemporary examples of Mead’s assumption
that time is used in the service of social control. For example, Barry Schwartz
(1
974) presents
an
intriguing empirical analysis of how imperfections in the
interpersonal synchronization of time, more familiar to us as waiting, express
the distribution
of
social power. Schwartz asserts that time
is
one of the many
resources distributed in stratification systems. Zerubavel (1987) makes a
similar point using language rather than behavior
as
a mode of communication
of status. Zerubavel suggests that various dimensions
of
temporality (dura-
tion, speed, frequency, timing) are manipulated as semiotic codes that convey
social messages about priority, importance, commitment, respect, and
intimacy, without having to articulate these messages directly.
It is
important to note that the degree to which time serves such exogenous
purposes varies across events. Arie Kruglanski’s (1975) distinction between
endogenous and exogenous motivations for behavior encodes this variation.
Exogenously motivated behavior is undertaken as a means to an (usually
future) end, distinct from whatever end might follow in the immediate situa-
tion. Endogenously motivated behavior, on the other hand,
is
undertaken as
an end in itself: the behavior is intrinsically rewarding, implying a present
rather than future orientation. In other words, it is only endogenously,
intrinsically motivated behavior that generates what Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
(1 988) calls “flow”or “optimal experience.” Flow involves focused concentra-
tion, total attention, and a “merging of activity and awareness.” Flow also
produces a distorted sense of time: “the clock no longer serves as a good analog
of
the temporal quality of experience . hours seem to pass by in minutes,
and occasionally a few seconds stretch out into what seems to be an infinity”
(1988,
p .
33).
If time is essentially a social construction, then it is imperative to under-
stand those factors that shape this construction. At a macro level, culture
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
5/19
MARKING TIME
429
imposes some constraints on the meaning and experience of time. Joseph E.
McGrath and Janice R. Kelly (1986, p. 18) speak of a ”culturally-dominant
conception of time.” Conceptions of the structure of time are culture-specific:
time may be viewed as continuous
or
divisible, as homogeneous
or
epochal
(composed of different periods). Time may be viewed as a single duration
or
as
a
succession of periods of definite length. The flow of time too may be
culture-specific: time may be uniform, composed of fixed-length units as a
watch would suggest, or it may be nonuniform, phasic. It may be linear,
cyclical, or spiral. It may be unidirectional or bidirectional. The ontological
status of time may also be culture-specific: is time objective and absolute,
existing separate from observers and events, or is it subjective and relational?
Even the very validity of concepts and measures of time is at issue. Time may
be viewed as singular; on the other hand, multiple, equally valid times may
coexist.
Examples of culturally-specific conceptions of time are not hard to find.
The dominant temporal paradigm of industrialized Western culture is
Newtonian. From this perspective, the structure of time is divisible, homo-
geneous, and composed of a succession of measurable units. The flow of time
is uniform, unidirectional, linear. In terms of ontological status, time is
perceived as absolute, abstract, objective, singular, and therefore accurately
measurable (McGrath and Kelly 1986). Other cultures conceive of time quite
differently. Some Asian cultures, for example, view time as indivisible,
phasic, reversible, cyclical, illusory, multiple, and relational. For many
American Indian cultures, time is continuous, nonlinear, and circular
(Shanley 1991). Subcultures within a dominant culture may also generate
varying conceptions of time. Frieda Johles Forman and Caoran Sowton
(1989) present a feminist analysis of time, for example, in which they contend
the “aggressively inear” Newtonian conception of time is constructed by men,
whereas women’s time is centered more about cyclical rhythms. To complicate
matters further, multiple, occasionally conflicting, conceptions of time may
coexist within an individual. We can operate simultaneously in multiple,
embedded time frames; one can view time as ultimately linear and directional
yet experience it immediately as cyclical (as weekly schedules imply).
The existence of culturally variant conceptions of time seems inevitable
given the unresolvability of questions about the structure, flow, ontological
status, and validity
of
time. The importance
of
this variation is that these
paradigms have implications
for
individuals’ phenomenological experiences
and behavior. From this perspective, the critiques Zerubavel directs toward
contemporary conceptions of time are culture-specific. According to Zerubavel
(1981), our temporal system is becoming ever more highly rationalized,
mirroring Western culture. Time has become characterized by “mechanical
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
6/19
430
JUDITH
A. HOWARD A ND JOCELYN A. HOLLANDER
periodicity” dictated by the schedule, the calendar, and the clock, with pro-
foundly negative consequences for both individuals and society. The coercive
aspects of regularity (e.g., enforced work schedules) allow for exploitation and
oppression. Repetitive routine results in a
loss
of spontaneity and freedom.
As technology becomes more sophisticated, temporal regularity is achieved
through social mechanistic control.
Temporal regularity also encourages the commodification
of
time. We
talk about “using time,” “spending time,” “saving time,” “buying time”: time
is a scarce resource that we count, measure, divide, save, exchange, buy, and
sell. A recent commercial embodies this philosophy: a sequence of customers
drives up to a drive-through fast food menu mike and orders, in turn, “an hour
or S O
a couple of minutes, and
a
few seconds to spare.” This quantitative,
economic-utilitarian philosophy of time has led in modern industrial society
to what Zerubavel (1981, p. 59) terms a “time famine” as we struggle to
include more and more activities in our finite schedules.
Yet this highly rationalized sociotemporal order does perform crucial
functions for social organization and meaning,
at
least in Western culture.
Temporal regularity imbues an otherwise random world with a sense of
orderliness, predictability, and normalcy. Regularity also allows for social
organization and coordination among individuals. The temporal regularity
embodied in scheduling allows for reliable public transportation, efficient
communication via mass media, and the budgeting of money over time, all
crucial features of contemporary Western society. Indeed such regularity has
important social consequences as well; the possibility of intentionally coincid-
ing schedules enhances social solidarity. And, even within the boundaries of
this highly quantified, objectified temporal order, time continues to have
qualitative aspects. The same social action can take on different meanings
depending on when it is performed: during the day, at night, during working
hours, during leisure hours. Temporal boundaries act as separation and
transition between different times, activities, and social roles. Temporal
boundaries often separate the public and private spheres,
or
religious and
secular times. This western sociotemporal order is the backdrop against which
interpretation of social action occurs.
Interpretive Uses of Time
Constructing se2f nd other.
Whatever the prevailing cultural conception,
time is a crucial factor in shaping interpretations. One of the most significant
illustrations of this influence
is
the temporal construction of identity. The
construction of identity occurs over an extended period of time. Kenneth
Gergen and Mary Gergen (1983, 1984) suggest that we construct life narra-
tives, stories that are woven through time and come
to
symbolize particular
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
7/19
MARKING TIME 43
1
life paths. Micro narratives refer to concrete and particular interactions;
macro narratives are more general and characterize life stages. These narratives
are also directional, that is, progressive, regressive, or stable.
Hazel Markus and Paula Nurius’ (1986) concept of possible selves,
future-oriented components of the self-concept that personalize and give
enduring cognitive form to one’s goals and motives, shows how we use time
as a cognitive marker in constructing current self. This concept suggests also
the continually shifting, yet partially stable, nature of the self. Markus and
Nurius suggest that both past and future possible selves motivate self-initiated
growth and change. Although these authors focus primarily on future selves,
Kathy Charmaz’ (1992) study of perceptions of self among chronically ill
people demonstrates that curtailments of an expected future can lead us to
focus on past selves. Both lines of research demonstrate that time plays
a
crucial role in defining the self. When speaking of a situated self, then, we
indicate that the self is situated in time as well as in relationships.
Stuart Albert (1977) proposes a more formal analysis of the significance
of temporality in defining self, recasting Leon Festinger’s social comparison
theory into a theory of intrapersonal comparisons across time. The following
are key propositions:
1
Humans are motivated to maintain a sense of an enduring self-identity over time and to
evaluate and adjust to perceived changes in aspects of the self over time.
2.
When objective evidence of an enduring self-identity is unavailable, we engage in
internal historical comparisons of present and past self-descriptions.
3 . The tendency to compare a current self with a past self decreasesas the temporal distance
increases. (However, it is noteworthy that the telescoping of memory, which seems to
accompany aging, contradicts this proposition.)
4 A discrepancy between current and past self-descriptions produces a tendency to change
both current and past self-descriptions, and there may be a tendency to change the view
of the past more than the view of the present. To the extent this proves impossible, we
tend to cease comparison with those past self-descriptions.
5
The more relevant a past self-description to an individual self-identity, the greater the
pressure toward uniformity
of
past and present self-descriptions.
6
Temporal comparisons that present evidence of progress or growth will be favored over
those that present evidence of decay or decline (consistent with Gergen and Gergen’s
[
19831hypothesis that we favor progressive over regressive narratives).
7. Temporal comparison is more likely if the affective quality of the present is negative
rather than positive.
Albert focuses primarily on the role of temporality in defining self. In the
research reported below we consider whether temporality and temporal com-
parisons play a similar role in defining and constructing others. It would also
be intriguing to extend this model to consider whether relationships between
self and other are part
of
the temporal contexts that shape the construction of
self and other. In other words, do we define self on the basis of key relationships
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
8/19
432
JUD ITH A. HOWARD AND JOCELYN A. HOLLANDER
which take on greater or lesser importance at specific times in our lives?
What times are defined as central may even reflect the significance of our
social relationships.
H u m a n
memory.
One seeming exception to the general assertion that there
has been little social psychological work on time is the vast literature on
human memory. Curiously, time itself is a vague and abstract variable in the
vast proportion of research on memory. Memory is typically divided into two
categories, for example, long-term and short-term memory. Everything that
is not immediately accessible in thought is categorized as long-term memory.
The length of long-term,and possible temporal divisions within long-term
memory, have not been addressed.
One relevant line of work pertinent both to memory and the construction
of self is Michael Ross’ research on personal histories. Ross (Ross and Conway
1986,
Ross
1989) stresses the social construction of autobiography, describing
how people use implicit theories of self to construct their personal histories.
Contemporary themes in social cognition shape much of this research, em-
phasizing the fallibility and bias in the construction of one’s past. Recall is
viewed as selective; consistent with Albert’s hypothesis, we retrieve from
memory what is most relevant and usually most consistent with current
concerns. We reinterpret and reinvent the past. We forget, and we fill in the
gaps in memory by inferring on the basis of the present what might have
occurred in the past. Thus the construction of personal pasts,like memories of
other social events, is vulnerable to a host of cognitive errors and biases (Fiske
and Taylor 1991). Ross does put this vulnerability in
a
different and more
positive light than many social cognitivists, pointing out that theories about
the stability of personal behavior and of one’s self lead us to assume continuity
in the absence of perfect information, an assumption that is often correct.
The significant point for the purpose of this paper is that we do have theories
of personal and interpersonal stability and change, and these theories guide
how we encode and remember social behaviors.
A n
Empirical
Illustration
Some of these aspects of time can be illustrated through an interdisciplinary
study of readers’ interpretations of two published short stories. This study was
designed to evaluate predictions from attribution and reader response theories
(Howard and Allen 1989, 1990). Because temporal themes were evident in
these interpretations, the transcripts of these readings are used as examples
of temporal influences on interpretation.
Texts
The two texts were William Faulkner’s (1946) “A Rose for Emily”’ and a
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
9/19
MARKING TIME
433
story by Jayne Anne Phillips (1979), “Home.” These texts were selected to
incorporate variation in writing style, probable familiarity with the texts
on
the part of the readers, and gender-related themes. In both stories the passing
of time is presented nonchronologically hrough flashbacks and reminiscences.
“A
Rose for Emily” is well-known; it is included in
a
number of twentieth
century short story collections. Briefly, “Emily” is about an older Southern
woman who has outlived her generation. The story, told by an unnamed
narrator who seems to represent the voice of the town, begins with Emily’s
death and in a series of flashbacks describes her youth, her close but tightly
circumscribed life with her father, her unexpected involvement with a Yankee
named Homer, and Homer’s disappearance. The story ends with the revela-
tion that Homer’s body has been in Emily’s bed for many years, with the
strong suggestion that she may have lain with his body all those years.
‘Wome” is a contemporary fiction, told by a member of the Vietnam
War generation. The narrator,
a
woman in her twenties, has come home to
live with her mother while going through difficult financial times. The story
follows the ambivalent relationship between mother and daughter. The
daughter is disturbed by what she sees as her mother’s settling for an unhappy
life. The mother has supported the daughter almost singlehandedly, even before
the death
of
the mother’s alcoholic husband. From the mother’s perspective,
the daughter leads an irresponsible and unstable life. Through a series of
flashbacks, the reader learns of the daughter’s high school relationship with
a
man named Jason and her more recent relationship with Daniel, a Vietnam
veteran. Daniel comes to visit. When the mother is at church, Daniel and the
daughter make love; they continue even when the mother returns, and she
hears them. She reacts by engaging in a ritualistic washing of clean dishes.
Sobbing, she later rebukes her daughter. The story ends with this difficult
emotional scene between mother and daughter.
Readers
The readers in this study were 55 female and 25 male students recruited
in summer school classes. Because some of these readers were adult profes-
sionals attending school for further certification, their ages and life experiences
were more advanced than those of the average undergraduate. Their average
age was 27.5 years;
63
were college students, and
17
of them had attained
a college degree.
Procedures
All participants were asked to read one of these two randomly assigned
short stories and to provide their reactions to
this
story through a tape-recorded
interview and completion of a written questionnaire. The readers were asked
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
10/19
434
J U D I T H A . H O W A R D A N D J O C E L Y N A. H O L L A N D E R
to comment on the story while reading it, with the instructions to ”tell as much
as you can about what you’re thinking and feeling” while reading the story.
They were then asked a series of structured interview questions. The transcripts
of these interviews range from one to
20
pages; the average length is 7 03
pages (“Emily”) and
8 .38
pages (“Home”).
General intem’ew questions
nd
codes.
Descriptive codes were constructed for
the responses to each of the structured interview questions. First, the readers
were stopped before the final plot sequence and asked to predict what would
happen
at
the end
of
the story and why. They were
also
asked about the
meaning of the story. We also asked questions specific to each story. Readers
of “Emily” were asked: Why did Emily kill Homer? Why did Emily sleep with
Homer after killing him? What is Emily like? What is the narrator like?
Readers of Wome” were asked: Why did the daughter sleep with Daniel?
Why did the mother react as she did? What is the narrator like? What is the
mother like?
Codes or temporal themes.
Each of the two authors (of this paper) read through
a subset of interview transcripts multiple times to identify mentions of tem-
porality and any dimensions of temporality. The resulting coding scheme
was used to evaluate each
of
the
80
transcripts. With phrases as the unit
of
analysis, any reference to events marked by time,
or
to possible causes or
consequences of events marked by time was coded in terms of as many as ten
variables. When both a cause and a consequence were noted and both referred
to time, both were coded. The full set
of
ten possible descriptors of cause
and/or consequence was treated as a unit. Although each unit logically could
contain up to
20
elements, most were much less extensive.
As
many as ten
units per transcript were entered into the data file.
Each cause
or
consequence unit included up to ten variables. The first
variable was the referent of the statement:
a
trait of one of the actors, an emo-
tional behavior,
a
goal-oriented behavior, an occurrence
or
event, a relation-
ship between the actors, the story as
a
whole,
or
mentions of the actor’s
changing
or
failing to change. Identification of the actor(s), where the referent
was a person, was the second variable. The third variable was the locus of
causality, the most prominent dimension in attributional analyses; was the
cause/consequence internal, external,
or
some combination of these two
dimensions? The fourth variable was the implicit
or
explicit motivation for
the causelconsequence; the categories were endogenous (often present-oriented)
or
exogenous (typically future-oriented: Kruglanski
1975 .
The complexity
of the causelconsequence was coded as simple
or
complex. In practice this
code proved difficult to apply and thus likely has low reliability. The generality
of the cause/consequence was coded simply as specific
or
general.
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
11/19
MARKING TIME 435
The temporal referent was coded into five categories: distant past, recent
past, present, near future, or far future. We also coded a more complex time
referent, mentions of temporal chains. Brickman et al. (1975) used the term
causal chains to refer to connected distal and proximal causes of a behavior.
We refer to temporal chains, that is, implicit or explicit connections between
two different times, for example, distant past-immediate past, or present-far
future. In coding these we distinguished among distant, recent, and immediate
past, present, and immediate, near, and far futures. We also coded mentions
of
narratives, distinguishing between micro and macro narratives, those that
refer to concrete and particular interactions versus those that are more general
and characterize life stages. We also attempted to characterize the direction
of these narratives as progressive, regressive, or stable, but this proved a more
complex distinction than the readers appeared to apply in their interpretations.
We also coded mentions of several more general variables which were
summed to create a total score for each transcript. These included explicit
mentions of time as a theme in the story, time as part
of
the structure of the
story, and any mentions of possible selves. We coded for past, future, or
time-unspecified possible selves of each of the major characters, the mother,
daughter, and Daniel in “Home,” and Emily and Homer in “Emily.”
Exploratory
Questions
We began by considering basic descriptive information. How prevalent
is the theme of time in these interpretations? Is time perceived as synchronic,
as prevailing social science models assume, or as diachronic? It
is
important
to note that both stories do present events that occur over a full lifetime, and
the passing of time is presented through stylistic techniques that make this
element of the structure of the stories salient. Thus we can assess how much
readers respond to available cues about time, not whether they would miss
its absence.
We consider next the perceived characteristics and structure of time: its
duration, scope, rhythms, and sequencing (including causal and interpersonal
sequences). We turn then to the role of temporality in interpretation. Do the
readers use temporal information about the actors in forming impressions of
those actors? Do readers construct life narratives? Are ”possible others” of
the key actors constructed and used as part of these interpretations? Are
Albert’s 1977) propositions about the role of temporality in defining the self
useful in modeling the construction of “other”?
Descriptions of Time
The most basic question is whether time is perceived as an important
element in these stories. In terms of general reactions to the stories, there are
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
12/19
436
J U D I T H
A .
H O W A R D
AND
J O C E L Y N A. HOLLANDER
163
mentions of time as a theme and
61
mentions of time as part of the story
structure. Thus, averaged over the
80
transcripts, time is mentioned as a
theme slightly more than twice in each transcript, and as part of the story
structure in
75
percent of the transcripts. Moreover, there were
73
mentions
of cycles and repetitions in these stories. The following quotations suggest
what we mean by time as a theme: ‘The picture of the house neglected as an
eyesore, probably a sense of time-in the old days it was great and now in the
new days it isn’t so good” (“Emily”). “How much
of
your old life gets locked
up with your present when you do go back” (‘TFlome”,).
The codes developed for the preliminary questions about each specific
story also reveal temporal themes. When explaining the ending they pre-
dicted, readers of “Home” noted that the story has no direction, or leads to a
confrontation. They commented also on the pace of the story and its reliance
on flashbacks. In summarizing its meaning, some readers suggested it was
about recollecting the past, about changes in time. Readers of “Emily” also
commented on the time sequences and the circularity of the narration. In
summarizing the meaning of this story, readers identified insight into the
time period, a sense of Emily as stuck in time, or
a
sense of gradual dying and
decay, as possible interpretations.
As
one example: “You get this sense
of
a
genteel lady from a previous time living in a world that doesn’t exist any
more. Taken together, these patterns suggest that time is indeed a significant
dimension in interpretations of these stories.
These stories are perceived also as diachronic, describing
the
state of the
relevant actors and events across temporal periods, rather than as synchronic,
presenting these entities as timeless and static. Of course, this depends in no
small degree on the actual substance of the stories.
It
is notable, however, that
the readers comment on the progression of events as progressions, the develop-
ment of personalities and style, as developmental. This is especially important
for perceptions of ‘Wome,”
a
story that many readers described as
so
realistic
as to be almost boring. The progressions in the substance of the story mirror
the progressions of everyday, diachronic life.
The
Perception
of
Time
Several variables shed light on how time is perceived. The coding scheme
itself is one indicator. The variable temporal referent was divided into five
categories, as noted above, and the transcripts did not show evidence of more
specific segmentation of time.
As
shown in Table
1,
the two most frequently
used categories were distant past and present. The relatively few mentions of
recent past as opposed
to
distant past, taken together with the lack of more
specific segmentation in the transcripts, suggests that these readers tend to
chunk time into relatively large, undifferentiated segments. The low
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
13/19
Table 1
Frequencies of the Perception of Time
Descrifitors of Time
Number o Mentions
Time Frame
Distant Past
Recent Past
Present
Near Future
Far Future
Temporal Chain
DP-IP
DP-P
RP-P
P-IF
P-FF
Narratives
Micro
Macro
Unspecified
Internal
External
Combined
Unit of Reference
Locus
Trait
Emotional Behavior
Goal Behavior
Occurrence
Motivation
Endogenous
Exogenous
Combined
Complexity
Simple
Complex
Specific
General
Combined
Generality
47
18
42
9
1
11
117
38
5
24
92
219
11
66
102
170
65
117
144
30
18
99
21
8
284
98
193
6
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
14/19
438 JUDITH A . HOWARD AND JOCELYN A. HOLLANDER
frequencies for either category of future probably reflect the content of the
stories rather than a more general pattern.
We imposed the greater specificity of the codes for temporal chains in
order to examine the full range
of
possible chains. The frequencies with
which readers used these chains also point to the rather simplistic segmentation
of time. Of 21 possible chains, there were five
or
more mentions of only five
such chains.
Of
these, three dominated readers’ reactions (see Table
1):
distant
past to present, recent past to present, and present to fa r future. These pat-
terns also suggest that these readers tend to structure time into large, undif-
ferentiated units. Another important message is that these readers do construct
temporal chains, linking events through time.
Another indicator of the phenomenology of time is the extent to which
these readers encode events in terms of narratives, stories that are woven
across time and that symbolize particular life paths (Gergen and Gergen
1983, 1984). As shown in Table 1, narratives are prominent in these inter-
pretations. A full 322 narratives are mentioned in these
80
transcripts. Macro
narratives, general stories that characterize life stages, are more than twice
as frequent as micro narratives, stories that refer
to
concrete and particular
interactions. This pattern is yet another indicator of the tendency of these
readers to perceive or construct larger phenomenal units of time. These
readers did not focus on the directions
of
these narratives. Clear directional
codes could be assigned to only twenty of these mentions of narratives.
Of
these, stable narratives predominated, but we hesitate to draw any conclusions
from these few examples.
Sequencing is another aspect of
the
perception of time. Many of the
interpretive codes point to the significance of both intrapersonal and inter-
personal sequencing. In “Home,” explanations of why the daughter slept with
Daniel focused on her unhappy series of love affairs. A number of readers
also pointed to serious negative interactions with her father many years ago
in commenting on the daughter’s personality. Some noted simply that she
focused on the past. Recognition of cohort shifts was
also
evident: readers
described the mother as a product of her age, and they noted also the dif-
ferences in attitudes between the mother and daughter. Comments on the
daughter’s relationship with her mother noted the temporal inappropriateness
of her living with her mother again after having already left home to go to
college. Looking at this pattern from the mother’s perspective,
a
number of
readers commented that the mother was jealous of her daughter, seeing that
her
own
past was over.
For
example: “Maybe she [the mother] is jealous
. .
because that
sets
her into thinking about her past and she herself cannot ever
do it again, while her daughter is enjoying it, so she
is
feeling very unhappy.”
Perhaps the most explicit examples of interpersonal entrainment are the
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
15/19
MARKING TIME 439
numerous references to the way in which the daughter seemed to
be
repeating
her mother’s life patterns, and to the possibility that the mother wanted to live
her life over again through her daughter. One example: ‘You feel the tension
between perpetuating the life style that the mother has done for her mother
[the daughter’s grandmother] and that she [the daughter] seemed doomed
to do for her mother.”
Many of these interpersonal sequences, of course, are also examples of
causal sequencing. The explanations noted above for why the daughter slept
with Daniel and why the mother reacted as she did-even for the very character
of the relationship between mother and daughter-all suggest a temporal
basis for causal inference. Indeed, virtually all of the trait attributions made
to both mother and daughter reflect temporal bases. Attributions about the
daughter as insecure, being a drifter, having had a bad childhood, not doing
well with men, being overly focused on the past, desperate for love, lonely,
insensitive, all in one way
or
another were connected
to
a life trajectory of
having been reared in a loveless marriage and abused by
her
father.
As
one
reader put it: “She [the daughter] doesn’t feel very secure, perhaps because
of what has happened to her in her childhood or when she was younger what
her father did to her. for the mother, characterizations of her as preoccupied
with sickness, acting like
a
victim, being narrow-minded, lonely, nurturant,
rigid, pessimistic,
or
preoccupied with sex, all reflect her experiences of
spending twenty years taking care
of
a family virtually
by
herself and without
gratitude. “ like the mother better because knowing her past about taking
care
of
the father and making the money for the house, makes you like her
better.
Similar patterns are found in interpretations of “Emily.” By far the most
prominent explanation both for why Emily may have killed Homer and why
she may have lain with his body referred to the overly restricted and close
relationship she had with her father while she was growing up, and to the
abandonment she felt upon her father’s death. The following example demon-
strates the interpersonal sequencing in
this
account. “He [Homer]
was
going
to leave and she couldn’t stand for him-for someone else to leave when her
father had left.” Causality is also explicit in this interpretation: ”She’s mentally
deranged by something that’s happened to her growing up. There must have
been some incident somewhere
or
her [father] probably somehow sheltered
her.” The prominent trait attributions to Emily also reflect temporal progres-
sions: she is characterized as crazy, lonely, sad, socially unskilled, solitary,
proud, independent, or masculine, all traits connected to the patterns of
her early life.
Causal search also seems to prompt the explicit mention of time. All of
the coded units include some reference to time. Among these, there are a full
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
16/19
440
J U D I T H A . H O W A R D A N D J O C E L Y N
A .
H O L L A N D E R
338 mentions of the causal locus of an event
or
behavior. This suggests, albeit
indirectly, that temporal references are generated in causal thinking. Goal-
oriented and emotional behavior are also particularly likely to generate
statements about time (see Table
1).
Exogenously motivated behavior is also
more likely than endogenous behavior to generate references to time.
Kruglanski (1975) suggests that most exogenous motivators are located in the
future. Given that the temporal references to past were far more frequent
than to the future,
it
would appear that these readers see exogenous motivation
as more likely to derive from past than future motivators. Further, the more
complex the referent, the more likely time will be mentioned. This pattern
is overwhelmingly evident in the complexity variable-almost none of the
referents were coded as simple. But complexity is evident in other ways as
well. The greater frequency of general as opposed to specific referents and the
preference for combined internal and external loci, as opposed to solely
internal
or
solely external loci, also suggest that temporality is more likely to
be mentioned when the referent is complex.
Time nd Self/Other Perceptions
Albert (1977) proposed a number of hypotheses about how temporality
is used to define self. We adapt these hypotheses to consider how temporality
is used
t
define other. Albert’s first proposition is that humans are motivated
to maintain
a
sense of
an
enduring self-identity over time. Our data suggest
that humans are similarly motivated to maintain an enduring sense of other.
The great majority of readers made trait attributions to the key characters in
these stories; indeed, evidence of spontaneous trait attributions was sub-
stantially more prominent than evidence of spontaneous causal attributions
(Howard and Allen 1989). As noted above, these trait attributions reflected
temporal bases either implicitly
or
explicitly. Specific comparisons between
past and present behavior were offered frequently in the interviews as support
for trait attributions.
The next series of propositions concerns the relationship between past
and present self-descriptions. Albert suggests that when these descriptors are
discrepant, we tend to change the view of the past more than of the present,
and that we select from past descriptors those that are similar to present
descriptors. Although these propositions may well apply to self-definition,
they do not
fare
so well with definition of other. The readers do not seem to
feel motivated by a desire for consistency of other across time. In defining
Emily and the mother in “Home,” readers focus primarily on the contrasts
between Emily and the mother’s pasts and their presents. Indeed, it is these
contrasts that provide feelings of empathy and pity for these characters.
Albert also proposes that a tendency to compare a current self with a past
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
17/19
MARKING
TIME 441
self decreases as the temporal distance increases. There is not much support
for this proposition when applied to the definition of other. Indeed, the inter-
pretations of “Emily” contradict this proposition; the readers tended to
compare Emily in her later years with who she was as a young adult, skipping
over much of her adulthood, despite the fact that the story does provide
information about her at varying points throughout her lifespan. In “Home,
”
the readers did compare the daughter’s curent self with both recent and more
distant pasts, but most of the comparisons made about the mother’s life again
drew on her more distant past. Thus within the constraints of the structure of
these stories, this proposition does not seem to apply to the construction
of
others, although it may well apply to the definition of self.
Two of Albert’s propositions concern the affective direction of change.
He suggests both that temporal comparison is more likely if the affective
quality of the present is negative rather than positive, and that comparisons
that demonstrate progress or growth are favored over those that demonstrate
decline
or
decay, echoing Gergen and Gergen’s
1983)
hypothesis that we
favor progressive over regressive narratives. These propositions themselves
are somewhat contradictory. If an end point is negative, then it would be
harder to find comparisons that demonstrate progress, unless a negative
present can be redefined as one that has provoked personal growth. Further-
more, the comparisons generated in “Home” suggest decline rather than
growth. Most of the readers of this story focused on the daughter’s slide into
a dependent and undirected life, a regressive narrative. Similarly, most
readers of “Emily”suggest that she has gone slowly insane, hardly a progressive
narrative. The failure to support this proposition may be due to the logical
contradiction suggested by the prior proposition that temporal comparison
is more likely when the present self is negative, as well as to the content of
these particular stories. On the other hand, it may also be due to the difference
between defining self and defining other: the concern with a progressive
trajectory, as with the need for consistency over time, may be associated only
with definitions of self.
Themes of temporality are also evident through the interpretive con-
struction of possible selves. These readers were not asked to construct possible
selves (although some did so in their commentaries, referring to themselves
as they interpreted the fictional characters). They did construct what we call
“possible others,” however. Possible others were constructed relatively fre-
quently for the main character in each story, the daughter and Emily. One
example: “She’s [Emily] either supposed to feel sorry for herself, or she’s
supposed to kill herself
or
something or get married.” “[From “Home”] the
daughter is afraid of turning into that person-her mother.
”
Far more of these
possible others referred to the future
59)
than to the past (seven), consistent
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
18/19
442
JUD IT H A. HOWARD AND JOCELYN A. HOLLANDER
with Markus and Nurius’(
1986)
conception of possible selves, but in apparent
contradiction to
the
temporal referents noted above. Possible others constructed
for the secondary characters, the mother and Homer, were less frequent, but
the preference for future referents remained
22
future vs. two past). Thus,
the construction of possible others-guesses about the projected futures or
pasts of these characters-is part of the interpretive process.
Conclusion
We have suggested that temporality is a central basis for the interpretation
of social life. In contrast to some social scientists, laypeople appear to con-
ceptualize time as diachronic, fluid, and progressive. Time itself appears to
be structured as rather general, composed of large, undifferentiated units
of
time. Temporality is evident in the causal and trait attributions made about
others and in the presence of varied kinds of temporal sequences in interpre-
tation. Although time is clearly an important element in defining others, it
operates differently from its influence on defining self. The use of temporality
in the construction of others is not as strongly shaped by the needs for con-
sistency
or
positivism. Based both on the theoretical reasoning and on the
empirical illustration reported above, we conclude that sociologists who seek
to understand interpretations of social life must incorporate temporality
into their analyses.
E N D N O T E
*This research was supported by a grant from the Graduate School Research Fund, University
of Washington. This is a revised version of a paper presented at the 1991 American Sociological
Association meeting.
REFERENCES
Abbott, Andrew. 1988. ‘Transcending General Linear Reality. Socialogi al Theory 6: 169-186.
Albert, Stuart. 1977. ‘Temporal Comparison Theory.” Psychological Review 84:485-503.
Brickman, Philip, Kathleen Ryan, and Camille B. Wortman. 1975. ‘Causal Chains: Attribution
of Responsibility as a Function of Immediate and Prior Causes.”Journal
of
Pnzonality
and
Social Psychology 32:1060-1067.
Charmaz, Kathy. 1992.
ood Days
Bad Days:
The
Self in
Chronic
Illness and
Time
New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, and Isabella Selega Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.). 1988. OpfimalExperience:
PsycholopiGal
Studies
o Flow in Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Faulkner, William. [1946] 1981. “A Rose
for
Emily.”
In
The Portable
Faulkner
edited by M. Cowley.
New York: Viking.
-
8/21/2019 1993-Sociological Inquiry
19/19
MARKING TIME 443
Fiske, Susan T., and Shelley E. Taylor.
1991.
Social Cognition. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Forman, Frieda Johles, with Caoran Sowton.
1989.
Taking Our Time: Feminist Pmspectives
on
Temporality. Oxford: Pergamon.
Gergen, Kenneth
J
1984.
“An Introduction to Historical Social Psychology.” Pp.
3-36
in
Historical Social Psychology edited by Kenneth
J
Gergen and Mary M. Gergen. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Gergen, Kenneth J. , and Mary M. Gergen.
1983.
“Narratives of the Self .”Pp.
254-273
in Studies
in Social Identity edited by T.
S.
Sarbin and K. E. Scheibe. New York: Praeger.
. 1984. ‘The Social Construction of Narrative Accounts.” Pp. 173-189 in Historical
Social Psychology edited by K. J . Gergen and M. M. Gergen. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Howard, J A,, and Carolyn Allen, 1989. ‘Making Meaning: Revealing Attributions through
Analyses of Reader Responses. Social Psychology Quarter@
52:280-298.
. 1990. ‘The Gendered Context of Reading.” Gender ?Society 4:534-552.
Kelley, Harold H.
1983.
‘‘Perceived Causal Structures.” Pp.
343-369
in Attribution Theory and
Research: Conceptual Developmental and Social Dimensions
edited by J. Jaspars, F.
D.
Fincham,
and M. Hewstone. London: Academic Press.
Kruglanski, Arie.
1975.
‘The Endogenous-Exogenous Partition in Attribution Theory.” Psy-
chological Review 82:387-406.
McGrath, Joseph E.
1988.
The Social Psychol ou
o
Time. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
McGrath, Joseph E ., and Janice R. Kelly.
1986.
Tim e and Human Zntmaction: To ward a Social
Psychology of Time. New York: Guilford.
Maines, David R., Noreen M. Sugrue, and Michael A. Katovich.
1983.
T h e Sociological Im-
port
of
G. H . Mead’s Theory of the Past.”AmcricanSociological Reuiew 48:161-173.
Markus, Hazel, and Paula Nurius.
1986.
“Possible Selves.”American Psychologist
41 :954-9 69.
Mead, George Herbert. 1929. ‘The Nature of the Past.” Pp. 235-242 in Essays in Honor ofJohn
Dewy edited by John Coss. New York: Holt.
.
1932.
The Philosophy ofthe Present. LaSalle, IL: Open Court.
Phillips, Jayne Anne.
1979.
“Home.” Pp.
7-25
in Black Tickets by Jayne Anne Phillips.
New York: Dell.
Ross, Michael. 1989. “Relation of Implicit Theories to the Construction of Personal Histories.”
Psychological Reuiew
96:341 -357.
Ross, Michael, and Michael Conway.
1986.
‘Remembering One’s Own Past: The Construction
of Personal Histories.“ Pp.
122-144
in Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations f
Social Behavior vol.
1,
edited by R . M. Sorrentino and E. T. Higgins. New York: Guilford.
Schwartz, Barry. 1974. “Waiting, Exchange, and Power: The Distribution of Time in Social
Systems.”
American Journal
o
Sociolou
79:841-870.
Shanley, Kathryn. 1991. ‘Time and Time-Again: Notes Toward an Understanding of Radical
Elements in American Indian Fiction.“ Pp.
243-256
in Transforming the Curriculum: Ethnic
Studies and WomenS Studies edited by J. E. Butler and J . C. Walter. Albany, NY: SUNY
Press.
Strauss, Anselm.
1991.
“Mead’s Multiple Conceptions of Time and Evolution: Their Contexts
and Their Consequences for Theory.” International Sociology
6:411-426.
Zerubavel, Eviatar. 1981. Hidden Rhythms: Schedules and Calendars in Social
Lif
Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
.
1987.
‘The Language
of
Time: Toward a Semiotics of Temporality.” The Sociological
Quarterb
28:343-356.