Search

The article analyzes the Amherst papers in relation to development of Parsons' theory. A careful analysis of the Amherst papers reveals that the basic ideas and philosophical principles that Parsons followed throughout his life were already in place, some more fully developed than others, yet forming an integrally coherent pattern to a surprising degree. The clear existence in Parsons's Amherst papers of a metatheoretical framework predating his later professional writing calls into question some still existing myths about radical breaks in the development of Parsons's theory. In one version of this mythology, Parsons began his theory as a voluntarist, then became a structural-functionalist, later moved on to become a systems-theorist and ended up as a social evolutionist. Despite such claims, Parsons always was a voluntarist, even during his so-called structural-functionalist middle period. The Amherst papers reveal an amazingly complex and logically coherent theoretical system-in the mind of a twenty-year-young man-and testify to an extraordinary scope of philosophical depth, and intellectual maturity.

This article comments on a paper by David Jenness, which focused on the efforts of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA) in organizing the social sciences in their own interest. The future of federal support for sociology will depend on the continued mobilization efforts of COSSA and upon public recognition of sociological contributions to the realization of two prime sets of values. Much has been written since 1981, when Reaganism became the guiding hand and official ideology at the federal level, of the need for new academic-industry partnerships. Most often, research training and subject-matter expertise were the initial factors to employment. Marketable skills opened opportunities that would have been shut to someone simply proclaiming sociology as his or her trade or profession. The virtues of a range of sociological skills are recognized much more readily: for information and intelligence, for systems analysis and design, for social trend analysis and forecasting, and in general for systematic scouting of the environment within which organized efforts in the public and private sectors operate, flourish, or decline. Herbert Costner once referred to this aspect of applied work as reconnaissance sociology.

The article discusses economic and social theory of Talcott Parsons. Parsons's persistent attention to economic theory has been relatively neglected by critics of Parsons who, in attacking the alleged functionalism of Parsonian sociology, concentrated on the issues of value consensus and normative integration, believing that Parsons had relatively little interest in the economic base of society. This neglect of Parsons's economic sociology was probably intensified by the Marxist undercurrent of much so-called conflict theory. In recent years there has fortunately been considerable interest shown in Parsons's analysis of economic theory and more specifically in his economic sociology. At Amherst, Parsons came under the influence of the philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn, who prompted his students to consider broad questions relating to alternatives to industrial capitalist society and who created an educational environment within which students were involved in a general analysis of the social sciences. It was this engagement with institutional economics that marked Parsons's departure from biology into the social sciences as an academic career. Parsons was introduced to a broad spectrum of social theory relating to cultural and biological dimensions of human existence as explanations of social differentiation.

How has sociology evolved over the last 40 years? In this paper, we examine networks built on thousands of sociology-relevant papers to map sociology's position in the wider social sciences and identify changes in the most prominent research fronts in the discipline. We find first that sociology seems to have traded centrality in the field of social sciences for internal cohesion: sociology is central, but not nearly as well bounded as neighboring disciplines such as economics or law. Internally, sociology appears to have moved away from research topics associated with fundamental social processes and toward social-problems research. We end by discussing strategies for extending this work to wider science production networks.

Discourse and ideology are interrelated concepts in social sciences and the humanities and are even occasionally employed interchangeably. This paper sheds light on their relationship in academic discourse and examines the role of sociology as a scientific field in its conceptualization. Using bibliometric analysis, we examined 15,716 academic publications mentioning "discourse" or "ideology" in their title and written in English by American and British scholars between 1966 and 2015. The investigation focused on the two terms' conceptual environment, areas of usage, journals, and the organizations to which the authors were affiliated. First, we conclude that although some sociology researchers have attempted to create a sociological definition for the concept of discourse, sociologists are not its most active users. The same is true for ideology. These concepts have established niches in other disciplines (political science and history for "ideology," and educational science and linguistics for "discourse"). Second, throughout the years, the field of discourse studies has become more diversified and fragmented than that of ideology. Third, the leading organizations in both fields are prestigious American and British universities, which indicates that discourse and ideology are elements of the intellectual elites' language. Fourth, the concept of discourse was more frequently applied than that of ideology in the years 2010–2015, and we expect that it will remain popular among scholars in the next decade. As for ideology, we believe that new social challenges could foster the rediscovery of this concept in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The process of evaluating papers for journal publication is a measurement process, similar to the other measurement processes of qualitative material in the social sciences. A good qualitative measurement technique rarely has a reliability coefficient of more than about 0.50 i.e., a correlation of 0.50 of one measurement with another measurement by the same technique. The square root of the reliability of a measure is the upper limit of its validity. If it is assumed that journal editing as a measurement process is as good as good qualitative measurement can possibly be, given this experience in the social sciences it would estimate the validity of a judgment of article quality to be about 0.70. The two major journals in Sociology accept about 16 per cent of the papers submitted to them. If the quality of papers judged is approximately normal, then one can say that papers judged to be 1 standard deviation or more above the mean of papers submitted will be accepted. Assuming a correlation of 0.70 between the true quality of the paper and the judged quality, one can estimate the proportion of acceptances of papers of different quality.

American sociology is a chaotic discipline. There is disagreement on foundational issues that give disciplines coherence. For example, sociologist disagree on the appropriateness of a scientific orientation, the role of activism and ideology in inquiry, the best methodologies to employ, the primacy of micro- versus macro-levels of analysis, the most important topics to study, and many other contentious issues. The recent call for a "public sociology" in which four wings of the discipline--policy (applied), professional (scientific), critical (ideological), and public (civic engagement) sociologies--are to be integrated is less of a remedy for what troubles sociology than an admission that we are a discipline divided (Burawoy, 2005). Among the social sciences, economics is the most coherent, with the other social sciences revealing varying degrees of incoherence or chaos. Sociology is probably the least integrated of the social sciences, although cultural anthropology has increasingly become much like sociology. In this paper, my goal is to offer an explanation for how sociology came to its present state and what, if anything, can be done to integrate the discipline. Let me begin by outlining what makes a discipline coherent.

Presents an affectionate portrait of the 84-year-old sociologist and renaissance man, Robert K. Merton. Merton's publications studied topics as diverse as historical scientific inquiry and contemporary racism. Not the least of his accomplishments was the creation of the focus group interview and the concept of self-fulfilling prophecy. (MJP)

Offers an insightful and perceptive portrait of the legendary sociologist C. Wright Mills by one of his former graduate students. Traces Mills's areas of interest from occupational characteristics to power groups leading to the publication of his seminal work, "The Power Elite." Discusses Mills's teaching styles and academic career. (MJP)

Following reflections by Talcott Parsons and Niklas Luhmann, this paper is concerned with the changing meaning of the profession as a sociological category for analyzing modern society. Professions are practical academic occupational groups oriented to certain social values, to which a special significance for society was attributed in the social sciences for a long time, thus marking a connection between professions' research and theory of society. This paper now describes that the causal relationship between profession and society is limited to a historically relatively early period. In the transition to modern society, this close network of relationships begins to dissolve, and now professions operate in the context of some function systems of society whose task is the professional assistance of single clients, such as in the fields of health, law, and pastoral care. However, the professions' highlighted position in the knowledge and action structure of single function systems seems to dissolve more and more today so that one can ask whether we can speak here already of an end of the social form profession. This would correspond with the observation that actually the professions no longer appear at all in the newer theories of society and therefore their function as an important mechanism of social structure formation is no longer attributed to them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Christian Smith's paper 'The Incoherence of 'Culture' in American Sociology' is a valuable provocation that can prompt us to reflect on the role of concepts and on the role of agreement on the definition of concepts in scientific research. In this comment paper, I raise questions about Smith's empirical expectation that sociologists should agree on a concept of culture based on debates in the sociology of science. I also suggest that in terms of the future agenda for the sociology of culture, we should distinguish between dialogue and clarification on the one hand, which I agree is needed, and standardization on the other hand, which seems incompatible with open-minded empirical research. Rather than work on agreement on what culture is, we might work on clarifying relevant distinctions among dimensions of culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traces the history of the sociology department at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, from its position as a top department in the 1950s and 1960s to its decline in the 1970s, and termination in the 1990s. Criticizes the administration for allowing the department's prominence to decline. Maintains that the closure will hurt all social science disciplines at the university. (RW)

Provides a personal account of the history and politics of the sociology department at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. Discusses classes offered throughout the Vietnam War years, concentrating on the more radical course offerings. Describes the professors who taught these courses. Maintains that the closing of the department is the result of a conservative administration. (RW)

How has sociology evolved over the last 40 years? In this paper, we examine networks built on thousands of sociology-relevant papers to map sociology's position in the wider social sciences and identify changes in the most prominent research fronts in the discipline. We find first that sociology seems to have traded centrality in the field of social sciences for internal cohesion: sociology is central, but not nearly as well bounded as neighboring disciplines such as economics or law. Internally, sociology appears to have moved away from research topics associated with fundamental social processes and toward social-problems research. We end by discussing strategies for extending this work to wider science production networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper discusses the form of the essay as a writing and thinking style in Sociology. By resuming some relevant German sociological writings (esp. Simmel, Weber and Elias), we explore how they are essays profoundly influenced the first Brazilian (pre) sociological writings. At the beginning of the institutionalization of Social Sciences in Brazil, we find essayists (esp. Buarque de Holanda, Freye and Prado) who wrote essential texts on the nation formation and Brazilian ethos. Its non-systematic, literary style and historical arguments join them together in what would be later called as the "Brazilian Essayism." After these first writings, although a scientific wave flooded Brazilian Sociology, the discipline have always referred (positively or negatively) to these seminal works. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the future of sociology archive as a discipline. The major U.S. university libraries now go to extraordinary lengths and expense to collect the papers of writers, even many who as yet have not been categorically identified as important. There is a serious lesson in this-one might even say, a vital one-for sociology as it confronts an uncertain future. As everyone of a certain age will recall, the saga of Roots, in book and television formats, single-handedly gave American blacks a collective sense of historical importance that up to that point was absent from mass culture. The new Holocaust Museum in Washington is the most eloquent and emotionally wracking contemporary expression of historical memory for public consumption on a grand scale. Other examples can be found at every juncture of the "culture wars" that have been raging in the United States since the 1960s. Every politically self-aware group is supposed to venerate its real or imagined past, both at individual and collective levels, not only because such joint expressions enhance self-conceptions but also owing to the strategic advantage.

The present article is by way of a report of a grant by the Russel Sage Foundation-not exactly an evaluation report, since the authors involvement in the event would make them suspect as judges, but rather a personal report of what occurred and the meaning that can, or should, be attached thereto. The Public Relations Committee appealed for cooperation from paper-readers, asking them in advance whether they would want a press interview in Miami. The paper by Robert Parke, Jr. and Paul Click, discussing the "marriage squeeze" resulting from the post-war baby boom, led all others in amount of space given to it. The American Sociological Association (ASA) therefore, both in its administration and in its membership, should have little concern for improving the "image" of sociology in the public eye, but it should have great concern for increasing the level of sociological information among persons outside, as well as within, colleges and universities. The fact is, however, the ASA structure has no device for handling communication with the public in more than fortuitous ways. As long as "press coverage" at conventions begins only a few weeks before the event and ends promptly at the last session, it is doubtful that success in this realm can ever be more than smooth public relations.

Given the increasingly competitive nature of the academic job market and the profession of sociology at large, publishing has become an even more important marker of scholarly success. This article discusses the benefits of publishing in academic journals during graduate school. We outline a series of strategies that doctoral students can use to achieve this important objective and address the role of academic mentors in fostering their students' research productivity. Strategic advice on each facet of the publication process (e.g., academic writing, journal selection, manuscript submission, and revision for resubmission) is offered. Faculty mentors and graduate program directors are encouraged to create an environment in which graduate student publications are the norm rather than the exception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decline of interest among sociologists in the works of Talcott Parsons over the last several decades has been driven in substantial respects by a belief that he was personally conservative in his political views and that his theoretical formulations were rigidly tied to a conservative view of social order. The present paper reviews Parsons' major political involvements through the course of his career from his student days through the last decade of his life. The review demonstrates that Parsons was a typical academic liberal of his time and that his liberalism was expressed especially in several major applied essays. In the 1930s, he was an early and active opponent of Nazism. During World War II, he taught professionals to administer occupied territories and nations effectively. After the war, he advocated for government support of the social sciences, citing the important contributions they had made to the war effort. In the 1950s, he wrote a famous critical analysis of the Joseph McCarthy movement in American politics. In the 1960s, he contributed supportive essays to the Civil Rights movement. Later in the decade and in the 1970s, he contributed to the protection of academic freedoms while also proposing accommodations to the demands of the student movement for more "relevant" teaching and greater participation in university governance. Throughout his career, he taught and worked closely with students of various political views and sought to protect their rights of freedom of political expression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents various updates from the American Sociological Association. These are as annual meeting, publications, medical sociology, program announcement, submission of papers, thematic sessions et al. Papers may be submitted directly to the session organizers or, if there is doubt as to the appropriate session, to Professor Dennis Wrong, Department of Sociology, New York University, Washington Square, New York, New York. The executive committee of the International Sociological Association has announced that the working group on Armed Forces and Society has been recognized as a standing research committee by the International Sociological Association. The library of the newly established University of the South Pacific indicates a dire need of gifts of books, research reports, back issues of journals, and reprints of articles in sociology, and social and cultural anthropology.

Despite long-standing prejudices against doing so, it is time for sociology to reconnect with its roots in biological and evolutionary thinking. Sociology emerged as a discipline when the notion of evolution was actively used in biology, geology, and emerging social sciences. Throughout the nineteenth century, many of the most prominent early European sociologists examined the social universe from an evolutionary perspective; and this perspective was borrowed in much of early American sociology in the last decades of the nineteenth century and in the first decades of the twentieth century. By the end of the second decade of the twentieth Century, however, evolutionary analysis was rapidly disappearing in sociology in the United States, and by the 1930s, it was pretty much dead. And for the remainder of the twentieth century, it was viewed with a great suspicion, especially evolutionary approaches that sought to incorporate ideas from biology into the field. Despite the revival of stage models of societal evolution and the emergence of new ecological approaches in the 1960s and 1970s, evolutionary ideas from biology were still rejected by most American sociologists though much of the twentieth century. In this paper, we first present the history of this rejection of evolutionary, with the goal of encouraging sociologists today to recognize the distortions and misrepresentations of Darwinian and Spencerian ideas that fueled intellectual prejudices for so many decades. These prejudices only get in the way of sociology in the twenty-first century, where biological ideas have begun to pervade the social sciences. Thus, American sociologists should now take stock and reconsider how much evolutionary and biological analysis can help sociology and, equally if not more important, how an informed evolutionary sociology can influence those in the other social sciences and even those in the biological sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explains the important role played by Harriet Martineau in the scientization of British politics and consequently in the development of Victorian Social Science. I suggest that there is much we can learn about the scientificity of social knowledge from the relationship between Martineau's deafness, her career as a social investigator and a reporter, and her reflections about the practice of social science. Because Martineau was a pioneer who entered into a field that was not yet institutionalized, her knowledge making practices inevitably reflects the particular dispositions that guided her innovations. Martineau's exposure, early in her career, to the modus operandi of governmental social investigations by royal commissions and her experience with popularizing the products of these investigations via wide public opinion campaigns, coupled with Martineau's specific dispositions as a deaf woman, facilitated her interest in mediating credible knowledge about society and helped her to develop an innovative methodological skill-set as a social investigator, which later on in her career made her a pioneer figure in the field of social science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a report from the editor of the book "Sociological Methodology" about the book. Papers submitted for publication in Sociological Methodology 1971 have concentrated on various kinds of methodological topics, ranging from wide-ranging explorations of the philosophy of social science to specific devices for collecting data on particular variables. Of the 43 manuscripts submitted, 11 were accepted for publication in the 1971 volume. In making the final selections for publication, the editor has depended, not only on the assistance of the advisory editors, but also on the evaluations of 56 additional editorial consultants each selected for their special competence in the topic of the paper referred to them and each of whom responded with reviews. Although some of the chapters included in the 1971 volume are based on mathematical and statistical reasoning that may be difficult for many to follow, other chapters in this volume require very little mathematical or statistical expertise.

This paper seeks to establish whether sociology departments should provide training in evaluation methodologies. First, the authors look at the current status of evaluation methodology courses within the offerings of sociology departments by examining course offerings from a sampling of sociology departments in doctoral and master's level programs across the United States. The authors then discuss whether evaluation courses should be offered in sociology departments at the undergraduate, masters, or doctoral levels and whether there are career opportunities for sociologists trained in evaluation research. The authors conclude with reasons why evaluation courses should be offered within sociology departments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term "relevant" within the context of a small-groups course in sociology seemed to mean participating in ongoing groups and observing and gathering data on small groups. Teaching by having students engage in research has also been advocated by articles in "The American Sociologist." The research approach is especially applicable for courses in small groups. But there are too many difficulties in having students carry out research to make research the central feature of a course. In most cases students would not be sufficiently knowledgeable to design and conduct meaningful small-group experiments. This causes problems too difficult for an untrained instructor to handle. The second reason was that while attracted to the learn-by-doing element in such a course, it was equally important to devote class time to covering theoretical concepts, research techniques, and general substantive material. According to the author, the ideal course would expose students to diverse theoretical approaches to small groups while meeting their demand for relevance in the form of group participation and involvement in research.

In economic sociology, relations and relationships have emerged as central yet poorly specified concepts. In this paper, I clarify these terms in a positive critique of the current state of the field. I then consider the ways in which the proposed framework can help analysts to bridge the divide between economics and sociology. Armed with techniques derived from formal network analysis, the new economic sociology offered the first sustained foray into economic territory, but sociological skeptics remain unsatisfied. Two broad rejoinders to this network-analytic approach emerged in the last two decades, but both correctives, nevertheless, leave the divide intact. In the last decade, however, a new paradigm is coalescing under the rubric of “relational economic sociology. While showing promise, it furthers the confusion surrounding the key concepts of “relations” and “relationships.” The proposed framework provides a foundation for constructive dialogue among the different traditions which constitute this new paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This section introduces the articles featured in the summer 2000 issue of The American Sociologist. As a new millennium unfolds, a global dialogue in sociology is underway that promises to enrich and renew culture-bound sociological imaginations. As Gary Marx notes, by 1911 Edward A. Ross, a towering figure in his day, had published a book for popular audiences about China as seen by a sociological traveler. Karl Marx brings this commentary up to date, and provides insight into a reality that Ross did not experience, namely, the teaching of sociology in Chinese universities. William Buxton has gathered together a fascinating set of materials about U.S. interest in Asia, with particular reference to Talcott Parsons, Harvard University and Japan. As he notes, these materials call into question simplistic views of Parsons as a Eurocentric thinker by documenting an ongoing encounter with Asia that extended from the 1940s through the late 1970s. One product of events at Harvard was a graduate-seminar paper written in 1941 by Marion Levy and rediscovered by him a half century later. In addition to its relevance for the emergent sociology of Asia, Levy's paper is a most interesting example of early functionalist analysis in U.S. sociology.

Charles Thorpe argues sociology lacks a "language of society as a whole." He holds that positivist sociologists de-legitimated holistic theories or broad normatively oriented "social theories," leaving the discipline without discursive means to critically assess and deliberate its overall directions and those of society. Thorpe does not address holistic theory directly or explain how it differs analytically from standard "sociological theory." My intent is to clarify these matters by extending facets of his argument to illuminate the interdependence between holistic theorizing and empirical-historical social science, which is necessary to create the type of "reflexive sociology" that Thorpe argues would make sociology more cosmopolitan and capable of addressing the turbulent sociopolitical conditions in the interregnum after neoliberalism. [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 paper revisits and reconsiders the prevailing assumption or conventional wisdom about the association or affinity between Puritanism and liberty in historically Puritan societies, especially America and to a lesser extent Great Britain. It argues and elaborates on that the “Puritanism and liberty” equation or link is a naïve assumption, speculative explanation or cherished liberal-democratic mythology analogous and related to, as well as even more enduring and prevalent than, what contemporary sociologists call the “beloved myth” of an elective affinity or connection between Calvinism and modern capitalism. The paper aims to fill in a void in the current sociological literature in which attempts to question and reveal the Puritanism and liberty equivalence as a myth are relatively infrequent. Overall, the paper aims to contribute to the existing literature on the relationships between Puritanism, Calvinism and other ascetic Protestantism on the one hand and modern democratic society on the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Some important work (Bulmer, Harvey) in the history of sociology questions whether the Chicago School should be identified with qualitative as opposed to more quantitative, statistical, and correlational methods. This paper will examine whether this characterization is a "myth" or whether there was some real basis for this association of Chicago sociology with qualitative research and a broader epistemological stance critical of radical neo-positivism. It does so by utilizing Floyd Nelson House's (1893-1975) The Development of Sociology (1936) as a primary source for answering these questions. House received his Ph.D. from Chicago in 1924, taught there in 1925-1926, and continued to identify himself as a Chicagoan after his appointment to the University of Virginia. Although his book provides a long historical survey, House paid ample attention to the development of American sociology. He frequently drew attention to the differences between Chicago sociology and that produced by the First Columbia School of Sociology founded by the radical neo-positivist Franklin H. Giddings. These differences focused on methods and epistemological stances. House identified himself as part of a Chicago "Group of Five" (including Park, Blumer, Eubank, and Bogardus) which questioned "concrete sociological research" in the absence of careful conceptualization. The contrast between Columbia and Chicago sociology in both descriptive and evaluative terms is, in fact, a leitmotif of what appears to be on the surface an impartial textbook. This paper concludes that the depiction of the Chicago School as welcoming to qualitative methods and much less inclined to radical neo-positivism than the First Columbia School is not a latter-day construction of neo or "wannabe" Chicagoans but has its roots in contemporary developments of the Chicago School in its heyday of the 1920s and 1930s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article compares philosopher Talcott Parsons's views with Habermas's theory. The entire basis of Habermas's communicative action banks on the distinctions Parsons made some sixty years previously, namely Habermas's notion of the universal validity claims underlying all speech. The three dimensions corresponding to the three validity claims are the subjective world, the objective world and the social world. This makes sense only in post conventional societies, because prior to that time, persons often drew upon only one world in making claims such as appealing to tradition, the divine right of kings, aesthetics, religion, or whatever. Habermas's penchant for grand, overarching theory was borrowed from Parsons and Parsons himself had been earlier influenced by that unique German brand of theorizing tracing back through Hegel and Marx, Simmel, Weber and Mannheim. In effect, the same logic underlying Habermas's analytic of the three worlds and the three validity claims can be found in the pages of Parsons's Amherst papers.

This article introduces a series of articles on sociology.

The article presents an overview of papers on epistemology and professional practice of sociology with topics such as the role of the journal "New Zealand Sociology" in creating a national sociology in the country, the concept of culture in contemporary sociology and conflict sociology.

This article attempts to identify some features of conference life that merit further study. The data derive mainly from conferences in the social sciences--sociology, criminology, anthropology, psychology--as well as social work and law. Criminology conferences supply the main data-set. As long as governments, foundations and research councils retain their touching faith that the crime problem can be solved by getting people together in hotels to talk about it, these will be rich sources for replication research. The findings are presented in the form of a guide--using guide both in the analytical and normative sense. No one believes anymore that observations are uncontaminated by the interests of the observer. So, this is like a tourist guide: what is there to be seen and how to extract the maximum benefits from the experience. Following the standard sociological distinction, we might divide benefit into its expressive and instrumental dimensions. The conference has two main expressive functions. First, there is the social need for regular gatherings to meet old friends, colleagues, students, research assistants, teachers and lovers--as well as find new ones. Second, there is the purely individual pleasures of travel, good hotels, gourmet food, exotic tourist sights and being away from family and work commitments.

After a review of comparable degree productivity among several social and behavioral sciences, this paper concludes that sociology was uniquely affected by forces that lowered both the production of B.A.'s, M.A.'s, and Ph.D.'s and the quality of its graduate students. From the mid-1970s to the late 1980s, sociology suffered drastic declines in student numbers and quality. The increased careerism among students apparently accounts for a substantial portion of this decline, but through a very concrete mechanism: the expansion of business programs. The paper suggests that perhaps an absence of a serious commitment to teaching scientific sociology accounts for the loss of quality, since applied sciences have fared much better than has sociology. The recent ASA Task Force recommendations for curriculum redesign are reviewed, and a call is issued for revitalizing the scientific component of undergraduate sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stratification in science has received extensive attention from researchers in the sociology of science. The general research strategy involves identifying certain socio-personal characteristics of scientists such as professional age, highest degree, prestige of training and affiliated institutions, and relating these characteristics to the reward systems in science. Two identifiable reward systems in science involve (1) the bestowal of honorary awards, and (2) the access to, and recognition in, the formal communication system in science. These two systems both contribute to the overall stratification of the reward system but differ on at least two counts. This paper attempts to examine the stratification of the formal communication system in American sociology as it is related to the stratification of scientists. It is found that the visible journals in sociology are consistently stratified according to criteria such as rejection rates, articles rejected but eventually published in other sociological journals, order of submission preferences of ASA meeting authors, and cross-citation patterns in articles of the journals.

There is a lack of agreement about the precise responsibilities of journal editors and referees. As a result, the moral responsibility of providing authors with prompt evaluations of manuscripts has not been sufficiently recognized. Other norms and expectations-for example, not to pressure referees for prompt reviews because of their unpaid contribution to the profession-frequently outweigh the responsibility to report promptly to authors, and scientists and scholars justly complain of the inordinate amount of time taken for editorial decisions on journal manuscripts. Ways must be found to emphasize the responsibility of the editorial staff and eliminate those who do not maintain their responsibilities. To this end, a specific proposal has been made to encourage prompt reviews. This proposal is calculated to offset some of the conditions that encourage delays by referees in evaluating manuscripts. By promising not to send more than a specified number of manuscripts f or review, the editor discourages referees from holding back reviews in order to avoid receiving additional manuscripts too soon. By getting referees to sign an agreement to return manuscripts to the editorial office within a stated time, the review process is shortened and scientific and scholarly articles are published sooner. Contributors are encouraged to notify editors when they have not received decisions within a reasonable time. Not only scientists and scholars but science and scholarship suffer from too-long-delayed editorial decisions. Contributors, professional associations, editors, and referees must unite to break the pattern of delay and find ways to emphasize the moral responsibility for prompt decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses about the official reports of the American Sociological Association. The Committee on Nominations in full conformance with the procedures set forth wishes to present its slate of nominees for the American Sociological Association, 1970- 1971. The Councilmen at-Large in full conformance with the procedures set forth wish to present their slate of nominees for the 1971 Committee on Nominations of the American Sociological Association. Four major issues already under consideration by committees of the Association were named, as follows: Creation and implementation of a code of ethics; Relations with the federal government in connection with research support; The nature and functions of Sections in the ASA; and Relations with international sociological associations. Systematic exploration of student and junior faculty participation in the Association's affairs and reconsideration of all aspects of annual meeting format are projected. Several ASA committees are now concerned with problems of teaching sociology. But the principal attention of the Council was devoted to the issue of ASA and public policy. On February 2, 1969, Council devoted the entire day to a wide-ranging discussion of the question, starting from a background paper prepared by Daniel Bell.

Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online marketplace designed for crowdsourcing tasks to other people for compensation, is growing in popularity as a platform for gathering research data within the social sciences. Sociology, compared to some other social sciences, has not been as quick to adopt this form of data collection. Therefore, in this paper I overview the basics of Mechanical Turk research and suggest its pros and cons, both in general and in relation to different sociological data-collection methods and research needs. While Mechanical Turk is currently the most popular crowdsourcing website for research, I present general concepts, patterns, and suggestions that can be applied beyond Mechanical Turk to other crowdsourcing and online research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Program evaluation is a booming professional field that encompasses a range of social science disciplines. This paper describes one sociologist's experience integrating the sociological perspective into program evaluation research. Examples described include accounting for social capital theory, social identities, and intersectionality. Conclusions discuss the impact of program evaluation research on a sociological evaluation of Black implicit in-group biases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Times of societal turbulence are painful for social theories tending towards optimistic accounts of the world. In the current sociological mainstream, so-called World Society Theory (WST), proposed by John W. Meyer and his colleagues, is one of the most contested examples. We discuss WST core conceptual assumptions with special emphasis on the concept of "Otherhood", which receives limited attention in literature but is central for the "promise" of World Society Theory in times of multiple crises, associated with ongoing global pandemic and its expected consequences. Analyzing recent debates, we outline directions for World Society Theory further development. We argue that important contributions to WST scholarship may come from another "grand theory", Integralism, elaborated by Pitirim Sorokin in middle twentieth century, which remains ignored in discussions about WST. Integralism, including its central concept of "Altruism", may be helpful in comprehending ontological grounds of "Otherhood", which may go beyond pure social construction. Integralism also allows expanding the analysis of causes, content, mechanisms and global macro-historical dynamics of "Otherhood", stimulating its more nuanced comprehension, including theoretical and empirical distinction between its various types. Integration of Pitirim Sorokin ideas in debates about WST is important for its further elaboration, including its optimistic and, thus, highly valuable "promise" for the global world and related implications for the practical role that social science can play in global development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior to his 1922 emigration to Europe and thence to the United States, Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin had an exceptional intellectual and political career in Russia and the Soviet Union (Sorokin , ; Johnston ; Krotov ). Indeed, he was among the early founders of the science of sociology in his native land, where, according to a relatively recent bibliography (Sorokin ), he produced 162 Russian-language publications between the ages of 21 and 33. This listing includes not only book reviews and journal articles, but also substantial monographs and a two-volume theoretical treatise. While still a relatively young man, Sorokin had thus gained widespread recognition as a scholar of the first rank. He was also the initial chairperson (from 1919 to 1922) of a fledgling department of sociology at the University of Petrograd (St. Petersburg), an elected member of the national Constituent Assembly and an appointed staff member of the 1917 Provisional Government, the first democratic regime in Russia. This much would have sufficed for an entry in a sociological encyclopedia, and Sorokin's political career has few parallels in the history of the field, other than the involvement of Emile Durkheim in French educational policy and the participation of Max Weber in creating the Weimar Republic in Germany. Nevertheless sociologists in the United States and most western historians of the field have not yet appreciated the full influence of the formative period, especially from 1905 to 1922. Lacking familiarity with Russian culture of that era and knowing little about the larger Russian socio-historical milieu, its intellectual discourse and collective memory, they have not been able to comprehend Sorokin's outlook, behavior and professional output in the United States in relation to these earlier contextual factors. This is arguably a fundamental reason why many U.S. sociologists have tended to see Sorokin, especially since 1937, as a marginal figure and to regard his works largely as deviations from accepted social scientific practice. This paper will argue that a more adequate appreciation of Sorokin's background and early adult life illumines both stylistic features of his works in America and also places into proper perspective several of his substantive foci that did not accord with contemporary 'normal science' (Kuhn ). In short, despite his overall assimilation into American society and higher education, including his appointment at Harvard University and his election as president of the American Sociological Association, Sorokin should be understood in large measure as a life-long Russian intellectual. His was a Russian-born sensibility and consciousness-indeed a 'Russian soul'-so deeply ingrained that it stamped his entire professional career in the United States, including his published researches, his popular sociology and his university teaching. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on some new approaches to the teaching of sociology, particularly team learning and small group dynamics. The author has described a teaching learning technique which, in so far as he could ascertain, was never used before. The program was open to undergraduate students at all levels. It included freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniors. In fact, anyone in the university wishing to study sociology was permitted to register. There were no enrollment limits or closed sections. On the basis of test performance and personal evaluation of the instructors based on conferences with students and general observation, the students enrolled in the Principles of Sociology course learned sociology principles as well if not better than if they had taken a conventional lecture course. Frequent comments from students reflect the fact that this program was much more interesting and challenging than the conventional course. Also, the upper level students got a good taste of laboratory research in observing the small group behavior. They were, without exception, motivated and even excited about their project. The monitors felt that they were doing something important. The groups that were observed were more real-life situations than are sometimes superficially formed for small group laboratory experiments.

Burawoy’s manifesto connects to a long series of debates on the role of science in society as well as on the myth of pure science. This paper argues that the gap between professional sociology and public sociology is far from being unbridgeable and that public sociology is not suppressed to the extent portrayed by Burawoy. In late modern societies a number of schools, including various scientific, public and intellectual movements have questioned the possibility, value position and social relevance of a functionally differentiated pure science by applying the sine qua non of modernity, i.e. critical reflection, to science. According to the argument developed here, also illustrated by a personal example, Burawoy could possibly prevent the gate-keepers of the empire of pure science from closing the otherwise open gates in front of his program and in front of critical reflection if only he used less harsh war-cries and were more careful in detecting the changes he himself urges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We can only welcome the discourse that has been initiated in our professional community with the concept of public sociology in the focus. Undoubtedly, Michael Burawoy has indisputable merits in fuelling this international dialogue. I find, however, that his position and conceptual framework is debatable at several points, therefore my review is on the side of those who criticize his ideas. My paper is divided into three parts: in keeping with the idea that the drop mirrors the ocean, I will start with the detailed critique of a single paragraph—the one which makes comments on his table entitled Types of sociological knowledge. It will be argued that by switching his viewpoints and using vaguely defined notions without empirical evidences he often tackles his subject inconsistently. Secondly, I intend to offer an alternative, three-dimensional conceptual model in which the social scientist’s prestige, influence and position on the action chain is taken into account as the main analytical aspects of the relationship between her/him and the public. Finally, based on this model, I propose to identify some strategies in order to find a better balance between the public and professional activity of social scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This collection of papers materialized in response to the American Sociological Association's call for centennial plenary sessions in 2004 as it prepared for the 2005 annual meeting in Philadelphia. Three of the nearly two-dozen centennial plenary sessions selected for the conference proceedings focused on the subject of sociological knowledge. One of these plenary sessions was organized by me; the other two, originally intended to be one session but divided in order to accommodate the large number of proposed presenters, was organized by Barbara Schneider. Shortly after the sessions were confirmed, I contacted Barbara to determine her interest in publishing some of the presentations as a collection that offered multiple perspectives on the nature of sociological knowledge. Based on the initial interest expressed by both Barbara and the presenters, I contacted Larry Nichols to determine if he might have an interest in publishing a special issue of The American Sociologist on this topic. Upon his consent, work proceeded forward on this special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on American sociology. The present paper aims to offer an explanation for how sociology came to its present state and what can be done to integrate the discipline. A discipline becomes integrated when there is relatively centralized control over the material, organizational and symbolic resources necessary for intellectual work. Material resources are necessary to conduct intellectual activities. Organizational resources are administrative control over the allocation of material and symbolic resources that enable a discipline develop coherence. Symbolic resources are cultural and include members of a discipline perceiving that they are part of a common intellectual community.

Public sociology is an attempt to redress the issues of public engagement and disciplinary identity that have beset the discipline over the past several decades. While public sociology seeks to rectify the public invisibility of sociology, this paper investigates the limitations of it program. Several points of critique are offered. First, public sociology's affiliations with Marxism serve to potentially entrench existing divisions within the discipline. Second, public sociology's advancement of an agenda geared toward a "sociology for publics" instead of a "sociology of publics" imposes limitations on the development of a public interface. Third, the lack of a methodological agenda for public sociology raises concerns of how sociology can compete within a contested climate of public opinion. Fourth, issues of disciplinary coherence are not necessarily resolved by public sociology, and are potentially exacerbated by the invocation of public sociology as a new disciplinary identity. Fifth, the incoherence of professional sociology is obviated, and a misleading affiliation is made between scientific knowledge and the hegemonic structure of the profession. Finally, the idealism of public sociology's putative defense of civil society is explored as a utopian gesture akin to that of Habermas' attempt to revive the public sphere. The development of a strong program in professional sociology is briefly offered as a means to repair the disciplinary problems that are illustrated by emergence of the project of public sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociological production is a situated and embodied activity carried out by individuals inserted in actual social relations. Considering that this feature has an influence upon the content of scholarly literature and that it can be revealed in the scientific text itself, I propound a new interpretation of the writing process of Robert E. Park's "The City," the famous paper he published initially in 1915. Customarily depicted as a manifesto for an autonomous urban sociology, I argue on the contrary that its general economy has to be linked to Park's biographical background. When he affiliated with the Sociology Department at the University of Chicago, Park was brought to teach a course on the social survey. "The City" was to be the academic expression of his point of view on the topic. Park's biographical encounters with some active promoters of the social survey approach are evidenced and their influence on his 1915 essay is carefully analyzed, showing notably that curious intellectual omissions in "The City" can be traced back to these previous encounters. Park's latter texts, and the 1925 revised version of "The City" in particular, are shown to provide the interwar sociologists with a peculiar narrative about the history of sociology: Park's predecessors are deliberately confined in a pre-scientific stage of the discipline and Park's original essay is presented as a seminal research program destined to be later fulfilled by the newly established urban sociologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]