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]

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 by Professor Bloom in connection with his receipt of the Leo G. Reeder Award for distinguished scholarship in medical sociology. The address was given August 12, 1989 to the Medical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association during its annual meeting, held in San Francis. co. [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 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 September 1, 1986 to the Medical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association during its annual meetings, held in New York City. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently interest has shifted from the fact of a relationship between social stressors and health outcomes to factors that may buffer the impact of social stressors. Many forms of the stress-resource-adaptation model are possible. This paper argues that there is not one, but at least two distinct versions of the stress-buffering argument. Statistical models corresponding to each of these versions are developed with an emphasis on the interpretive logic of each model. Three other models described are not consistent with the notion of stress-buffering, but are sometimes thought to be. If more than one form of stress-buffering exists, then it ix possible that some coping resources play a "dual" buffering role. An illustration of how dual stress-buffering works suggests the importance of searching for such resources. Criteria for delimiting and distinguishing cases of stress-buffering from non-cases are discussed in the final section. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a revision of the address given by Professor Fox in connection with her receipt of the Leo G. Reeder Award for distinguished scholarship in medical sociology. The address was given August 29, 1984, to the Medical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association during its annual meeting, held in San Antonio. [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]