Search

This paper reviews the author's experience in becoming a medical sociologist before the field had become formalized. The contributions to medical sociology of sociologist Selden D. Bacon and physician and medical educator William R. Willard are described. The relationship of medical sociology to medical behavioral science, as experienced at the University of Kentucky, is discussed. Finally, the thesis of the author's 1957 paper on the nature and status of medical sociology is re-examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cross-functional teams (CFTs) play an increasingly important role in health care. However, despite their potential, CFTs often fail to function effectively. This paper contributes to the literature in medical sociology by examining how the steep and well-defined hierarchy characteristic of the health occupations proves to be dysfunctional in the CFT setting. Previous research has shown that status differences among members of work teams negatively affect their functioning. Yet the specific mechanisms that connect variations in status to poor team functioning remain unclear. We hypothesize that it is the suppression of participation among low status team members that leads to poor CFT functioning. Our theoretical model integrates status characteristics theory and the value attainment theory of job satisfaction to link team members' statuses to participation in team decision-making and, ultimately, to their attitudes about the job. We use causal modeling to test our hypotheses. Our results indicate that relationships between health professionals defined in broader social contexts affect status, roles, and functions within CFTs, and these, in turn, affect the team's interpersonal processes. We suggest changes in organizational structure and in team leadership styles that might make CFTs more effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the social construction of diagnosis and illness in several ways. First, I discuss the centrality of social construction in medical sociology. Next I discuss the major role of diagnosis in social construction, leading to the need for a sociology of diagnosis. I emphasize controversial and conflictual diagnoses, as a first step toward a more general sociology of diagnosis. Then I put forth a typology of social construction, involving four combinations based on whether a condition is generally accepted and whether a biomedical definition is applied. Next I detail a series of stages in the social construction of a condition. In that process, my primary concern is the initial social discovery, which is essentially a matter of diagnosis, with a secondary emphasis on illness experience. This is followed by stages of treatment and outcome, which recursively affect social construction. I conclude by noting the health policy implications of the social constructionist perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a revision of the address given upon receipt of the Leo G. Reeder Award for distinguished Scholarship in Medical Sociology. It was presented on August 19, 1987 to the Medical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association during its annual meeting held in Chicago. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper utilizes a social constructionist perspective to examine the widespread belief among physicians during the early 1980s that an oversupply of doctors was either present or imminent. It was found that the timing and growth of physician beliefs in a "physician glut" during this period could not be adequately explained by net increases in the physician supply, either on an absolute level or relative to the growth of the general population. Rather, this "fact" of a physician surplus was found to be more fruitfully explored as an emergent social phenomenon grounded in the historical evolution of physician-supply themes and the particular clinical practice environment in which physicians found themselves in the late 1970s and early 1980s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this thoughtful paper, Mechanic discusses the differences between quantitative and qualitative researchers, focusing on health-related issues. It should, of course, be evident to readers that the issues he discusses have applicability far beyond medical sociology. The same issues arise in all kinds of social research and the excellent examples he gives can be expanded easily to examples in areas including education, criminology, industrial relations, social stratification, and others. In my reading of his paper, Mechanic discusses both differences between methods at a single point in time and differences in measuring process across time. As a quantitative survey researcher, I will comment on my perceptions of the similarities and differences between observational and survey methods for cross-sectional research. I then discuss some methods for bridging the gap that do not involve diaries. Finally, I discuss procedures for measuring process using observational and diary methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]