Search

The main purpose of this paper is to provide a biographical sketch of the late Hans L. Zetterberg and a historical background to a translation of an essay based on a lecture given by Zetterberg in Stockholm in 1995. In it, he recounts his time at the Department of Sociology at Columbia University in the years 1953–1964. This essay is full of insights into an inspiring and formative period for Zetterberg in the United States, particularly in the stimulating milieu that was Columbia, at this time the center of American sociology led by Robert K. Merton and Paul Lazarsfeld. In the introduction to this translated essay, I give a brief overview of the establishment of sociology as a discipline in Sweden, and the transfer of knowledge between the United States and Sweden (and Europe, more broadly), embodied in Hans Zetterberg. In the post-WWII years, American sociology, which had a strong positivistic imprint, played an important role in shaping the beginnings of Swedish sociology. However, the transfer of knowledge went both ways, with Zetterberg, a semi-central and often neglected figure, being both a significant contributor to sociology at Columbia in its period of greatest prominence, and in his native Sweden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the creation of an intellectual biography of the U.S. sociologist Talcott Parsons. The researcher discusses Parsons' doctoral dissertation dealing with capitalism that was analyzed by sociologist Max Weber, and how Parsons' work delivered sociology from social Darwinism at the turn of the twentieth century. The author supports Parsons' work on the basis that he was a thinker and academician who did not use inconsistent analysis. The author utilized Parsons' archives at Harvard University, such as Parsons' paper "The Problem of Controlled Institutional Change."

This paper examines the place and contributions of women at the Institute for Research in Social Science from 1925 to 1945. Founded by Howard Odum at the Unviersity of North Carolina in 1924, the Institute provided an environment in which women could pursue social scientific work free from the gender discrimination found at most universities during the period. Research and publications by the women made important contributions to sociology and related fields while fulfilling the Institute's primary mission of promoting regional understanding and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American Dream is among the United States' most recognizable and revered symbols of our national heritage. Celebrated in popular culture, this statement of national purpose has been analyzed by commentators across the broad range of humanistic and scholarly disciplines, including American sociology. While sociology has developed a lengthy history of studies dedicated to 'the American way of life' and - to a lesser degree - the role of the American Dream in society, the work of sociologists from earlier eras arguably over-shadows many of the efforts undertaken since the millennium. The present paper argues that sociology is especially well suited to investigations and analyses of the role and impact of the American Dream and urges a re-dedication of sociological efforts to chart its meaning and influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the close resemblances evident in their major works, their critical stance and their politics, C. Wright Mills and Alvin Gouldner have received strikingly different responses from their sociological peers, and they now occupy very different places in the collective memory of the discipline. This intriguing discrepancy provides the basis here for a comparative case study that examines both ongoing commemorative practices and historical evidence. This paper shows how the sociological community has frequently and approvingly commemorated Mills through introductory textbooks, as well as reading lists for doctoral comprehensive examinations, awards in Mills' honor and biographies of Mills, while doing much less to preserve and promote the memory of Gouldner and his contributions to the field. In an effort to attain a better understanding of such differences, I compare the prescriptions that each advocated for the discipline, especially as these are expressed in Mills' Sociological Imagination and Gouldner's Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. The analysis emphasizes how Mills explicitly sought to move beyond sociology, in a narrow academic sense, and called for well-honed empirical endeavors with relevance for a variety of publics, whereas Gouldner proceeded largely as an academic theorist who demanded sociological-theoretical reform. Unlike Mills, he did not breach the gap between academia and the general public. These findings illustrate an apparent paradox, namely, that American sociology in the twenty-first century may reserve its most esteemed positions for internal critics who advocate movement beyond its contemporary confines. [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]

Academic employment depends on student enrollment. The bull market in higher education in the U.S. that ran from the mid-thirties to the present has passed its crest. In fact, it appears from a recent release by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics that, while college enrollments did not drop absolutely until just this year, they began to recede relatively four years ago. The proportion of white high school graduates who entered college reached 57 percent in 1968, then began to fall, until by September of 1972 it had dropped to 49 percent. This paper was specifically commissioned to suggest some changes in the training of sociologists designed to increase sociological opportunities. Another way of stating the article's purpose is to answer the question on the difference between the training for non-academic positions and training for academic positions. Far from presenting temptations to dilute academic training for sociological research, preparation for the role of non-academic sociologist would take for granted all usable benefits that conventional research training has to offer, then add to it in a number of important respects. The activities in which sociologists have hitherto been employed within non-academic institutions have been primarily in research and research will figure heavily in their activity in the future-with certain qualifications. The article, therefore, focuses on just those types and methods of research which are relevant and important to these institutions, in preparation for which current academic training needs to be substantially supplemented.

This section introduces a series of articles on financing sociological research. The late Alvin Gouldner presented us with a fundamental paradox that those who supply the greatest resources for the institutional development of sociology are precisely those who most distort its quest for knowledge. The problem of financing sociological research is not the burden of individual researchers, it is the challenge to a discipline and a profession that must take account of a shifting cultural-political climate and be accountable to a restive public. The paper by Martin Bulmer examines the unique role of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, under the directorship of Breadsley Ruml, in distributing relatively large amounts of money for social research during the 1920s. Highlighting the entry of more direct federal government support for basic social science research, Roberta Balstand Miller's paper, The Social Sciences and the Politics of Science: the 1940s, examines the debate about the inclusion of the social sciences in the legislation that established the National Science Foundation.

The article focuses on the sociological research opportunities that can be found in Canada. The Canadian case offers a veritable cornucopia of research opportunities for the American sociologist. Although Canada is similar in many ways to the U.S., it also differs in significant respects. Given that many important variables can be held more or less constant, opportunities for theoretically meaningful research abound. Likewise, implications for policy are plentiful. The rapidly evolving nature of race relations in Canada might well inform discussions in the U.S. Until as late as 1975, Canada's racial minorities were a minuscule proportion of the overall population. After a change in immigration policy, the percentage reached 6.3 percent in 1986; and 11.2 percent in 1996. In the Canadian census, as well as in standard academic discussions, aboriginals are not included with visible minorities. While there is variation in the situation of visible minorities--some are quite prosperous--the situation vis-a-vis aboriginals is otherwise. The figures on poverty, unemployment, life expectancy, incarceration, murder, and so forth are extreme and show only modest signs of improvement. Canada has always been bilingual. Canada is also a bi-religious country. It used to be that Protestants outnumbered Catholics in a pattern somewhat similar to that in the U.S.

The Detroit Area Study (DAS) has served for 25 years as one model of how a sociology faculty can combine productive research and graduate training within a single small unit. This paper outlines the current structure and costs of DAS, describes its math advantages and limitations, and suggests several ways in which other universities might develop units that are similar but not identical to DAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we explore the intersection of the modern-stare and fieldwork practices within the social sciences. Our contention is that during the past decade or so there has been an expansion in forbidden or restricted research terrain that threatens the present and future conduct of social research. We argue that this restriction has been engendered by two related developments: privatization and human subjects regulations. The social and political implications of these trends are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the role of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, a foundation set up by John D. Rockefeller Sr. in memory of his wife, which between 1923 and 1928, under its director Beardsley Ruml, distributed twenty million dollars for social science research The Memorial supported major programs of sociological research at the University of Chicago and the University of North Carolina, as well as providing important assistance to individual sociologists (such as Elton Mayo) and to institutions at which sociology was taught (such as the London School of Economics) The Memorial during the 1920s laid the foundations of the pattern of large-scale sociological research in the contemporary American university. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that foundation support of black social scientists between the world wars was a status quo oriented response to changes in the social, economic, and geopolitical status of blacks in a society presumed to be permanently biracial in law and thought Through documentation largely drawn from foundation archives and the biographies of philanthropists, foundation administrators, and social scientists, the race leader role that foundations expected black social scientists to fulfill in a rigid racial caste order is discussed Mention is also made of how the accommodative race leadership role foundations created for black social scientists restricted their range and control of research activities and influenced the careers of Charles S Johnson, E Franklin Frazier, and other black social scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociological associations in the U.S. are generally viewed as existing on two levels: national and regional. A third level, however, does exist: the intra-regional. Even though sociologists know very little about organizing at this level, intra-regional associations may become increasingly important to the discipline because of labor market pressures, broader participation in the profession by teaching sociologists, the influence of revenue sharing on research funding and the energy crisis. Intra-regional associations are frequently referred to as state associations; however, the data indicate the former classification is more valid. The purpose of this article is to describe the organization of sociology on the intra-regional level. How little sociologists know about this level was demonstrated early in the research. A roster of intra-regional associations was not available from the national or the regional levels. Consequently, a letter was sent to the sociology department chairman at a university in each state. A questionnaire was sent to each association and it was filled out by one or more current and/or recent officers. Attitudes expressed by the respondents should be considered their own and not representative of the total membership.

This section presents news briefs on congresses and meetings organized in relation to research and teaching of sociology in the U.S. The main business of the council of the International Sociological Association (ISA) at the meetings in Varna, Bulgaria, held in September 1970, was to adopt a revised constitution. A preliminary draft of a revised constitution had been prepared by a committee chaired by Stein Rokkan. The document provided for much wider membership participation in the affairs of the ISA. On the other hand, in his book The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology, professor A. Gouldner foresees the possibility of a rapprochement between Western and Soviet-Marxist sociology. The World Congress of Sociology was a highlight for the sociological and ideological establishment of the East European Communist countries. Convened under a president from a socialist country, and held in such a country, the congress was attended by many delegates from eastern Europe. Meanwhile, the First National Congress on Optimum Population and Environment was conceived in January 1969 when four individuals active in the environmental reform and population control movements met at a meeting addressed by a population biologist. A six-member program committee organized the congress into plenary sessions and small work groups.

This article focuses on the dissemination of sociological dissertation findings in the United States. In an attempt to obtain an understanding of the extent to which dissertation findings are disseminated through a variety of media, a questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 200 sociologists drawn from the members of the American Sociological Association residing in the U. S. who hold the PhD. By means of an open-ended format, members were asked to list publications, read papers, and any other means by which findings of their dissertations had been disseminated. It should be noted that this method is broad not only in including numerous avenues of dissemination, but also in including dissemination throughout the entire professional careers of respondents up until the time of this study. The original mailing in February, 1974, together with a follow-up mailing in March, yielded a response rate of 72%. It might be noted parenthetically that the largest number of papers were read at annual meetings of the American Sociological Association. The next largest number were presented at the Southern Sociological Society meetings, followed closely by the Pacific Sociological Society

Historical binaries constrain Turner's narrative, American Sociology: From Pre-Disciplinary to Post-Normal. The identification of mid-20th century American sociology as a gold standard for judging predisciplinary and post-normal sociology paints the epistemological challenges of the 1960s and 1970s in an unnecessarily negative light. The conflation of feminization with feminism reduces the contributions of Sociologists for Women in Society and collapses them into a narrative about a generational struggle between men. The focus on the elite-mass dynamics of academic labor markets misses the vibrancy of the broader disciplinary project of contemporary sociology. The prospects for 21st century sociology are more positive than Turner imagines. Rather than a scientific failure with a damaged brand, 21st century sociology offers a more reflexive and culturally nuanced form of sociology appropriate for the deeply unequal, global and mediatized social world we inhabit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay treats Burawoy's advocacy for public sociology as a social problems claim. Using a social constructionist approach, I examine the rhetorical strategies Burawoy uses to construct the discipline in a way that makes public sociology seem not only relevant, but integral to what sociologists do. Sociology's history, ethos and practitioners are framed in ways that make its commitment to the civil sphere appear as a 'natural' direction for the discipline. Certain features of the discipline are foregrounded. Motives and desires are imputed. Villains are constructed and the paths to progress are outlined. By examining the framing strategies Burawoy uses to present his vision, the promise of public sociology is called into question. I do not argue that public sociology is without value. Rather, I unpack the claims its advocates make and question whether public sociology can deliver on its promise of a better sociology or a better society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The origin of homosexuality has been the subject of systematic study in many disciplines during the previous century. In the social science literature, two general models concerning the etiology of homosexuality have emerged, the essentialist model and the constructionist model. This article reviews these two models and provides empirical data on their relative support. Support for each model has been gauged by assessing the opinions of sociologists. Data was obtained from a random sample of sociologists teaching in colleges and universities throughout the United States. The major finding is that the majority of sociologists now endorse the essentialist position. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After reviewing the debate about public sociologies in the American Sociological Association over the past few years, we offer a response to calls for "saving sociology" from the Burawoy approach as well as an analytic critique of the former ASA president's "For Public Sociology" address. While being sympathetic to the basic idea of public sociologies, we argue that the "reflexive" and "critical" categories of sociology, as Burawoy has conceptualized them, are too ambiguous and value-laden to allow for empirical investigation of the different major orientations of sociological research and the ways the discipline can address non-academic audiences. Debates about the future of sociology should be undertaken with empirical evidence, and we need a theoretical approach that can allow us to compare both disciplines and nations as well as taking into account the institutional context of the universities in which we operate. Research into the conditions under which professional, critical, policy, and public sociologies could work together for the larger disciplinary and societal good is called for instead of overheated rhetoric both for and against public sociologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the research activity in sociology by faculty at liberal arts colleges. We used Sociological Abstracts to compile a list of journal articles published from 1960 to 1999 for which the first author's affiliation was among the 161 schools classified as liberal arts colleges by the Carnegie Foundation. We rank the colleges by the number of journal publications over the whole time period as well as a subset of the last ten years, and provide information on which journals are the most frequent outlets for liberal arts faculty. Finally, we provide some evidence that this research output is linked to teaching effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses that in the early 1950's a research committee within the International Sociological Association (ISA) was formed around the topics of social stratification and mobility. An important impetus to this convocation of international interests was the dearth of empirical studies of occupational mobility in the industrialized and industrializing nations of the world by which to assess sociological speculations regarding the interplay of cultural values, economic development, and changes in institutionalized inequalities and social stratification. Subsequent parametric estimates of mobility in Italy, the United States, and Australia were published by Lopreato (1965), Blau and Duncan (1967) and Broom and Jones (1969) respectively. Now, a second generation of national mobility studies is underway, with some already out of the field and others well under plan. Owing to interim developments within the discipline, these second generation studies promise greater comparability of data and clearer insights into comparative sociological processes than did the first generation.

This article discusses the contributions of sociological research to public policy in the U.S. Most federal agencies with social science research grant programs use advisory panels to evaluate specific research proposals and such panels usually include sociologists. In such programs where the practice of peer review is followed, sociologists make important contributions in determining the content and direction of research grant programs. These contributions, important as they are, have little influence on policy formulation or implementation. For obvious reasons, including legal constraints, advisors advise and do not make policy. Policy decisions always involve important ethical, budgetary and political judgments. Research may help make clearer the probable consequences of alternative actions. Indeed, agencies have been criticized for over reliance on task forces, commissions or committees to study and advise on specific issues or problems. A reasonable conclusion is that academic sociological research, as supported by federal research grant programs, can hardly be expected to make significant contributions to public programs. The organizational characteristics of the university and of the federal establishment militate against such contributions.

This article presents developments in the field of sociology, as of February 1, 1966. The 61st Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association will be held at the Hotel Fontainebleau, Miami Beach, Florida, and August 29 to September 1. 1966. The Institute on American Freedoms announces its sponsorship of a prize essay contest for graduate students in sociology. An award of $1,000 will be made for the best original research project on "frontier problems in the field of criminal law or the administration of criminal justice." The University of Michigan, Department of Medical Care Organization of the School of Public Health, announces the availability of fellowships for a program of study leading to the Ph.D. degree in medical care organization. The American Public Health Association Inc. will hold its 94th Annual Meeting in San Francisco on October 31 to November 4, 1966. Survey Research Center, the University of Michigan announces that for the nineteenth consecutive year, the center will hold a Summer Institute in Survey Research Technique.

This article examines the sociological research opportunities created by draft lottery in the U.S. The draft lottery has taken the total male population of the country between the ages of nineteen and twenty-six and randomly assigned to each member a number between 1 and 366. This number, determined by the date of birth, represents the sequence in which members will become eligible for military induction. It may be relevant to note that other estimates based on projected draft calls denoted the inevitable as the only first fifth, while later evaluations suggested that the assumption of any increase in predictive power is misleading, since local Selective Service boards will not all have the same distribution of eligible inductees. Viewed in terms of an experimental model, it is striking that except for draft eligibility sequence the three thirds represent fully comparable groups randomly constituted from the same universe. Even furthering the approximation to strict experimental design, it seems legitimate to suppose that nineteen to twenty-six-year-old males with known ineligibility factors would amply serve as a control group. One result of the draft lottery is that it is possible to investigate some of the effects of Selective Service procedures.

This article discusses the epistemological foundations of sociology. Little sociological perceptiveness is required to predict that the promulgation of a Code of Ethics by the Council of the American Sociological Association in the fall of 1968, though it may serve to quiet the growing unease that spokesmen for the body politic have evidenced of late regarding social research, will in fact contribute to the divisiveness rather than unity in the house of sociology itself. Already of caught up in a paradigmatic revolution in which conflict has challenged system as the presumptive base of the discipline's conceptual life and confronted by a massive desertion from the orthodox images of the sociologist's role, the sociological community will discover the code functioning paradoxically to fragment consensus even further--at least for the immediate future. Though it is tempting to regard the development of the code as but a strategic response to the threat of further federal action constraining social research, the divisive response it has begun to elicit suggests that the discipline may be forced--as it seeks to recapture a common self-understanding--to re-examine its epistemological roots. The orthodox solution to the conflict between sociological intention and civic duty, effected in the 1940s and 1950s was the segmentation of the person into roles. Linked immediately to this was the near universal acknowledgment that the product of such research was framed in the indicative, never in the imperative, mood.