Search

This special issue of Information, Communication, and Society (ICS) is edited by the Communication, Information Technologies, and Media Sociology (CITAMS) section of the American Sociological Association and includes papers that were first presented at either the 2021 or 2022 ASA meetings or Media Sociology Symposia. For this special issue, an innovative editorial approach was taken that brought the editing process into a graduate classroom. That process is described below along with a brief introduction to themes of the selected articles. Key themes for this special issue include content analysis, ethics, privacy, new economy, and digital inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current period of disruptive social change is inextricably bound up with new means and modes of communication, information, and media streams. The Communication, Information Technologies & Media Sociology section of the American Sociological Association (CITAMS) locates these factors at the center of our collective interests, investigating them through a plethora of methods, theories, and empirical cases. Each year, CITAMS runs a special issue in ICS showcasing select works presented at the previous year's American Sociological Association conference and the affiliated Media Sociology preconference. Papers in the 2022 CITAMS Special Issue reflect a social context defined by a prolonged global pandemic and wrought by democratic uncertainty. Across these social circumstances, technology and media loom large. Simultaneously, everyday life continues and classic CITAMS scholarship sustains relevance for the ways people interact, construct identity, consume, and mobilize. All of this and more are contained in the pages of this year's Special Issue, from which readers can get a sense of what CITAMS has to offer and consider how their own work may fit within the broad CITAMS umbrella. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Erving Goffman's written legacy bears on sociology as a whole, or so he argued in his Presidential Address to the American Sociological Association (Goffman, 1983). However, while being celebrated as important to the discipline, his work is also interpreted in inconsistent ways, often downplayed or marginalized, and even neglected. This paper claims that Goffman's "well known aversion to self-disclosure" (Shalin, 2013) does not justify overlooking his trajectory, from the unknown "margins" of a Canadian small town to the elusive "center" of American sociology—and much less does it justify still circulating assessments of his personality, crafted while overlooking his life experiences—and, especially, his writings. Anecdotal evidence of his "enigmatic" personality (Lemert, 2003), or "bad-boy outrageousness" (Berger, 1986), works as a derailing tactic, leading to unwarranted appraisals of Goffman's personality—and, more importantly, to the neglect of crucial aspects of his work. From a theoretical standpoint, Simmel's treatment of "the stranger" as a social relationship, and Merton's concept of "moral alchemy", are used here to try to make some sense of the mixture of celebration and neglect still surrounding "Goffman". Historical data was gathered in part from the "Erving Goffman Archives'' (Shalin, 2013). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In summer, 1976 Norm Denzin and Norb Wiley acted, as a Symbolic Interactionist lobby, to try to get a more centrist, middle-of-the-road editor for the American Sociological Review. We wanted one who could represent female epistemology, which is less narrow than that of males. We also wanted a female as editor She would be the first female ASR editor. So it was a gender lobby as well as Symbolic Interactionist. Wiley attended the American Sociological Association Council meeting where this issue was discussed. We wanted to formally state our position in an address to the ASA Council. The ASA Secretary, Bill Form, attempted to keep us off the agenda, and we needed a vote from the Council approving our inclusion. This paper describes the fight at the meeting between Bill Form and Wiley, along with comments from the Council members. The lobby got the required votes and Wiley gave the prepared statement. As a consequence we did get a female editor (Rita Simon). And we promoted the issue of how representative the American Sociological Review and the other sociology journals should be. Later Wiley continued to promote social theory, and Denzin achieved several important accomplishments toward broadening and democratizing the field of sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer review is a central institution in academic publishing, yet its processes and effects on research remain opaque. Empirical studies have (1) been rare because data on the peer review process are generally unavailable, and (2) conceptualized peer review as gate-keepers who either accept or reject a manuscript, overlooking peer review's role in constructing articles. This study uses a unique data resource to study how sociological manuscripts change during peer review. Authors of published sociological research often present earlier versions of that research at annual meetings of the American Sociological Association (ASA). Many of these annual meetings papers are publicly available online and tend to be uploaded before undergoing formal peer review. A data sample is constructed by linking these papers to the respective versions published between 2006 and 2012 in two peer-reviewed journals, American Sociological Review and Social Forces. Quantitative and qualitative analyses examine changes across article versions, paying special attention to how elements of data analysis and theory in the ASA versions change. Results show that manuscripts tend to change more substantially in their theoretical framing than in the data analyses. The finding suggests that a chief effect of peer review in quantitative sociology is to prompt authors to adjust their theoretical framing, a mode or review I call 'data-driven.' The data-driven mode of review problematizes the vision of sociological research as addressing theoretically motivated questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been renewed interest over the past 5 years among sociologists in empirically examining the status of sociology in high school. The few studies that have recently been conducted, however, have focused almost exclusively on high school sociology teachers. The nature and structure of the courses themselves have been largely ignored. Given the American Sociological Association’s recent attempts to develop and implement an Advanced Placement course, it seems especially important to examine the characteristics of existing sociology courses. This paper uses the results of a national mail survey to describe and discuss three aspects of the nature and structure of a random sample of sociology courses that were offered during the 2005–06 school year: instructional materials and pedagogical resources, teaching techniques, and course content. I demonstrate that these aspects of the courses look remarkably similar across the country: Teachers rely overwhelmingly on standard introductory textbooks to structure their courses. They are also apt to utilize supplemental materials from textbook publishers and from newspapers and newsmagazines, and to use a combination of lecture and discussion in their sociology classes. The paper concludes with recommendations for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports on two joint sessions of the British and American Sociological Associations held during the course of 2001 as a first step toward more structured dialogue and debate between the two national associations. Drawing on the comments of a number of leading academics on both sides of the Atlantic, this paper presents a series of discussions about the role and future of urban sociology. It explores the challenges and opportunities offered to urban sociology by increasing interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity in the field of urban studies as a whole. It then explores the role of sociology in understanding the relationship between contemporary processes of globalization and urban change and the degree to which this constitutes a new dynamic core of sociological theory and research. The paper reveals that there are a variety of alternative futures for urban sociology and there would appear to be little agreement on one specific route, nor on how to get there. Urban sociology continues to face a variety of challenges and more debate on its future trajectory is clearly needed but it remains a vital and expanding sub–field. Cet article rend compte de deux sessions communes des associations de sociologie britannique et américaine qui ont eu lieu en 2001, premier stade vers un dialogue et un débat plus structurés entre les deux organismes nationaux. Partant des remarques d’un certain nombre de grands intellectuels des deux côtés de l’Atlantique, ce travail présente plusieurs discussions sur le rôle et l’avenir de la sociologie urbaine. Il examine les défis et possibilités que lui offrent l’interdisciplinarité et la pluridisciplinarité croissantes dans l’ensemble du domaine des études urbaines. Il explore ensuite comment la sociologie aide à comprendre la relation entre les processus contemporains de mondialisation et de changement urbain, et la mesure où peut ainsi émerger une nouvelle dynamique nodale pour la théorie et la recherche sociologiques. L’article expose plusieurs avenirs possibles de la sociologie urbaine, sans qu’il y ait apparemment d’accord sur une voie particulière ni sur le moyen d’y parvenir. La sociologie urbaine rencontre toujours de multiples défis et il faut manifestement approfondir les débats sur sa future trajectoire, mais elle demeure un sous–domaine à la fois crucial et en expansion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay describes institutional ethnography as a method of inquiry pioneered by Dorothy E. Smith, and introduces a collection of papers which make distinctive contributions to the development of this novel form of investigation. Institutional ethnography is presented as a research strategy which emerges from Smith‘s wide-ranging explorations of the problematic of the everyday world. Smith‘s conception of the everyday world as problematic involves a critical departure from the concepts and procedures of more conventional sociologies. She argues for an alternative sociology which begins with the standpoint of the actor in everyday life, rather than from within a professional sociological discourse aligned with the society‘s ruling institutions. The familiar sociologies of everyday life do not suffice for this purpose, since they deal with local settings and social worlds, but stop short of examining how these are knitted into broader forms of social organization. In contrast, institutional ethnography examines how the scenes of everyday life are shaped by forms of social organization which cannot be fully grasped from within those scenes. The principal tasks of institutional ethnography include describing the coordination of activities in the everyday world, discovering how ideological accounts define those activities in relation to institutional imperatives, and examining the broader social relations in which local sites of activity are embedded. The four papers which follow demonstrate that specific contributions to institutional ethnography can be made in relation to a wide array of topics, methods, and interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the intellectual benefits and lessons learned from a symposium for junior sociology scholars, sponsored by sponsored by the History of Sociology (HoS) Section of the American Sociological Association (ASA), at the New School for Social Research on August 10, 2013. Among the lessons learned are the need for long-term perspective in decision making, little money for food, and flexibility in the exclusion and inclusion of criteria for participation. Information on papers submitted for the symposium, including on sociology, social change, and the work of sociologist W. I. Thomas, is also presented.

Although the issue of boundaries is not new, in recent years sociologists have shown renewed interest in the topic. For example, the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association in 2006 featured the theme of boundaries. This paper is an exploratory effort to analyze sociological work on boundaries and to compare and contrast this work with a biblical view on this topic. In doing so, the following issues were discussed: the blurring of boundaries, overemphasis on boundaries, idolatry, and more specifically, issues of boundaries in the area of marriage and family, gender roles, social identity, and materialism. From this it can be concluded that there are gaps that should be addressed, discussed and written about from a Christian perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American Sociological Association and the American Society for Public Administration are widely recognized as being among the premier professional associations in their respective fields within academia and beyond. Although a commitment to the promotion of ethical competence among their members is clearly viewed by both organizations as being central to the accomplishment of their missions, their techniques for doing so have included unique, as well as similar initiatives, to include, perhaps most importantly, periodic reviews and revisions of their marquee Codes of Ethics. While these reviews, which have been undertaken from an intra-disciplinary perspective, have been productive, it is the position of the authors that to approach future reviews of their ethics codes, and other ethics initiatives, from an interdisciplinary, collaborative perspective could serve to facilitate even more insightful modifications. To that end, this paper 1) provides a comprehensive, comparative overview of the ethics initiatives of the two professional associations, 2) presents a summary of what the authors will have learned with respect to the feasibility of continuing to pursue the proposed collaboration between the two associations, and 3) if it is determined that continuing efforts are warranted, presents a formal plan for moving the initiative forward toward a positive conclusion with regard to the ASA and ASPA as well as for potential expansion to other organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper revisits the observation made by Ward and Grant (Current Perspective in Social Theory 11:117–140, ) that there had been a “peculiar eclipsing” of women in sociological theory. It provides longitudinal studies of women’s participation and recognition in three conventional outlets for sociological theorizing: the theory section of the American Sociological Association (ASA); sociological theory textbooks; and sociological theory journals. It finds that the percentage of ASA Theory Section members who were women increased from 12% in 1982 to 31% in 2008, but is not nearly as high as the 53% in all ASA sections taken together; that women’s recognition in sociological theory textbooks grew, more between the 1980s and the 2000s than between the 1960s and the 1980s, undoubtedly reflecting the increasing respectability of feminist theory within the profession; and that women’s relative participation as authors in sociology theory journals increased from the 1980s to the 2000s by about 33%, but nowhere near as much as their participation as authors in the American Sociological Review, where their relative participation in the 2000s was more than three times what it had been in the 1980s. We speculate that, given women’s increasing leadership roles in both the Theory section and the theory journals, women may be using less conventional outlets for their theorizing than is offered by either the section or the journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a discussion on the congress of American Sociological Association in San Francisco, California, in August 2004. To reflect on congresses and exhibitions is a sociological work since, in addition to the information that they provide on the development of the profession of sociologist, they have a symbolic considerable impact. Already before the globalization, several professional North American affiliations turn into the international affiliations of the discipline. What is discussed in the San Francisco congress has so many relevancy for Spain as the Eighth Spanish Congress of Sociology, in September, 2004 in Alicante, Spain. The majority of the specialties coincide. Some papers and debates are similar. The methodological problems are also common in both the congresses. The ideas that they discuss in the world, fortunately, already do not diminish to a geographical national ambience. Almost two hundred specific sessions with written communications have been distributed.

This paper summarizes briefly the formal relationship between the American Sociological Association (ASA) and the seven regional sociological societies, suggests that little has resulted from the affiliation, and recommends (1) the ASA Committee on Regional Affairs be terminated, and (2) four other ways of linking the national and regional societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the book "The Structure of Social Action," by Talcott Parsons. The paper was prepared, at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association in 1987, a session held to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of the book and it drew a large and interested audience. The Structure, would at that time have been taken as a founding event in a relatively consensual, proto-scientific discipline. For even as late as the mid 1960, Structure was still seen as parsons had originally presented it: as a framework of accumulated theoretical knowledge, on the basis of which predictions could be made and compared with what social scientists had subsequently discovered about empirical fact. But there are even more important reasons for the continuing contemporary relevance of Parsons' early work. It is not only that there continue to be important discussions about, and in relation to the book earlier concepts. It is also that people can now understand the influence of Structure in a more reflective and more accurate way.

This article reflects on the progress of the American Sociological Association (ASA) from 1905 to 1980. The author relates that when she took office elate in 1949, there were approximately 2,700 members on the Society's roles. Ten years later there were 7,000. With the Reorganization Committee of 1950 anticipating the potential, certain goals for the Association were set early in the decade. There were eight goals that the society was determined to accomplish. It is a matter of record that considerable progress was made during the decade of the 1950s in moving toward these goals especially the first six Constitutional changes were affected. membership participation was broadened. An executive office was organized. Several new publications were started. Membership services generally were expanded. All the annual meeting, over 300 papers were presented in 1960 in contrast to 77 in 1950. In two important respects, however, the mid-century ASA was somewhat less effective in performing its supportive role in expanding the uses of sociology and in aiding the development of the discipline. For example, responding to indications that sociologists were needed in a variety of practicing professions, ASA together with Russell Sage Foundation, undertook a series of bulletins on the fields of sociological application.

The article focuses on the impact the paper "The Missing Feminist Revolution in Sociology," written by Judith Stacey and Barrie Thorne in 1985, had on the study and teaching of sociology. The paper argued that sociology, in contrast to other social sciences, had warded off attempts by feminist scholars to transform the field's theoretical and conceptual frameworks. A discussion of a study of the paper, which took place at the 2005 meeting of the American Sociological Association is presented.

This article presents an acknowledgement by the editor to his colleagues for entrusting the job of editorship of the "Social Psychology Quarterly." They will strive to publish the highest quality work that significantly advances the understanding of the complex links between the individual and society. To that end, invitation for the submission of both empirical and theoretical papers that address those links, regardless of theoretical perspective or investigative and analytic strategy will be made. They will also encourage the submission of papers from scholars around the world and across academic disciplines. Although this journal officially belongs to the American Sociological Association, it is believed that it is the property of a much larger scholarly community. That community spans the globe as well as traditional disciplinary boundaries. Its members include everyone committed to systematic study of how the individual is shaped by and shapes her or his social and cultural environment.