Interactional Anomie? Imaging Social Distance after COVID-19: A Goffmanian Perspective


  • Vincenzo Romania FISSPA Department, University of Padua



covid-19, social distance, Goffman, anomie, social theory


Social distance is a central issue in the institutional communication about COVID-19. The expression has often been improperly used as a synonym for physical distance. In this article, I will compare how international agencies have used the concept in their documents with Erving Goffman's sociological theory on social distance. The Canadian sociologist is, in fact, the author who has explored the sociological aspects of social distance most deeply. In the third section, summarising Goffman's work, I will try to define a possible research agenda to be developed in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic. Finally, I will analyse some elements of social change already visible in various parts of the world. The aim is to understand how COVID-19 could transform some social and ritual aspects of interpersonal distance. The main hypothesis is that in the immediate aftermath of this pandemic crisis, we will live in a period of moral inter-reign, in which we will experience a form of interactional anomie. This concept is also aimed at integrating the already rich Goffmanian theory on the interaction order, from a perspective that takes in account both the classic Durkheimian concept of anomie connected to dramatic social change and the Parsonsian theory of double contingency. I still do not know how long the pandemic will last and how many further quarantine periods will occur in the future. This is therefore more an exercise in sociological imagination (Wright Mills, 1959) than a sound, grounded theory.


Bogardus, E.S. (1925). Measuring Social Distances. Journal of Applied Sociology, 9: 299–308.

Burns, T. (2002). Erving Goffman. London: Routledge.

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2016). The Mediated Construction of Reality. London: Wiley.

Elias, N. (2001). Society of Individuals. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Goffman, E. (1952). On Cooling the Mark Out: Some Aspects of Adaptation to Failure. Psychiatry, 15(4), 451–463.

Goffman, E. (1955). On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction. Psychiatry, 18(3), 213–231.

Goffman, E. (1956). The Nature of Deference and Demeanor. American Anthropologist, 58(3), 473–502.

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Daily Life. New York: Doubleday.

Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, Doubleday & Co.

Goffman, E. (1963a). Behavior in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings. New York: The Free Press.

Goffman, E. (1963b). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Anchor Books.

Goffman, E. (1969). Strategic Interaction. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.

Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books.

Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Goffman, E. (1983). The Interaction Order. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 1–17.

Lofland, J. (1969). Deviance and Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lofland, J. (1980). Early Goffman: Style, Structure, Substance, Soul. In J. Ditton (ed.), The View from Goffman (pp. 24–51). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Manning, P.K. (1976). The Decline of Civility: A Comment on Erving Goffman’s Sociology. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 13, 13–25.

Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. New York: Free Press.

Rosa, H. (2013). Social Acceleration: A New Theory of Modernity. New York: Columbia University Press.

Simmel, G. (1949). The Sociology of Sociability. American Journal of Sociology, 55(3), 254–261.

Simmel, G. (2018). On a Psychology of Shame. Digithum, 21, 67–74. (Original work published 1911).

Thompson, J.B. (1995). The Media and Modernity: A Social Theory of the Media. Cambridge: Polity; Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Thompson, J.B. (2020). Mediated Interaction in the Digital Age. Theory, Culture and Society, 37(1), 3–28.

Turner, R.H. (1990). Role Change. Annual Review of Sociology, 16(1), 87–110.

Vanderstraeten, R. (2002). Parsons, Luhmann and the Theorem of Double Contingency. Journal of Classical Sociology, 2(1), 77–92.

Verhoeven, J.C. (1993). An Interview with Erving Goffman. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(3), 317–348.

Wright Mills, C. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.




How to Cite

Romania, V. (2020). Interactional Anomie? Imaging Social Distance after COVID-19: A Goffmanian Perspective. Sociologica, 14(1), 51–66.



Special Feature