Is there anyone expert about Mead theory of roles?

"both interviewing (Meretoja, 2014) and sensemaking (Laroche 1995; Lant 2002; Weick 1993) are theorised as enactment of actions to exchange symbols, giving the possibility to explore human experience also as a symbolic interaction. Here “the world cannot be known as such but is brought about by acting upon it. It does not lie there ready to be interpreted, but has to be made sense of” (Hernes & Maitlis, 2010, p. 31). In this way, knowledge is understood to be originated from subjective interpretations of reality, which in the literature is referred as the social construction of reality (Berger & Luckmann, 1967). Nevertheless, those subjective interpretations are mediated through the use of shared symbolic schemas of knowledge, such as the language. Those interpretations are better understood as intersubjective, because underlining its shared nature will overcomes the limit of a mere subjective reality. Symbolic interactionism is the most suitable paradigm for the present research, because its “emphasis is on individual sense making, expressed through its detailed development of the role of the self in the construction of reality” (Prasad, 2018, p. 19). Indeed, in our case the focus of the research is both on how political communicators made sense of their professional role, as well as how this could have influenced the interpretation of the Covid-19 context. It was Mead (1977), one of the most influential philosopher of the phenomenological pragmatism, who contributed to the diffusion and development of symbolic interactionism, conceiving that people in order to make sense of a situation decide which role to enact, thus projecting already some of the possible circumstances. According to Mead (1977), people interpret a situation by staging different roles which correspond to the expectations of the context. So roles and identity are an adaptation to the context, because “humans have the capacity to resolve blocks to ongoing activity by internally manipulating symbols to review and choose among potential solutions” (Stryker, 2008, p. 17). Therefore, the role that one takes, is due by the context and vice versa, where the roles are enabled by communication, and communication depends on the interactive and exchange of meanings, which is “constantly being modified through a series of individual interpretations” (Prasad, 2018, p. 21) among the engaged parts. To this extent, the perceived and the enacted roles are behavioural and cognitive symbols exchanged inside and outside individuals, which generate new knowledge to people. Therefore, using the Symbolic Interactionism as a Paradigm, as also PR and Sensemaking theorized, means to focus on those multiple identities, roles, meanings and contexts as phenomena of negotiation. Indeed, multiple realities exist, and through interviews the researcher has the function of let them emerge and observe how interviewees self-identify and perceive their role in the narrated events. I argue that the use of interviews can provide a window over those meanings generated in those contexts, because it allows to reproduce and to grasp a situated knowledge by a person as well as the contextual believes in relation to other social actors."

Do you think those words are accurate and correct about Mead works on roles enactment?

Thank you in advance :D