Search

The paper written by Professor Delbert Miller about the future direction of industrial sociology is critiqued. Miller addressed the related two related themes which are the need for sociology departments to remodel offerings to compete for students in the educational marketplace and the importance of sharpening the discipline's identity as a specialization directed at business and industry. As a result of the proposed changes in the discipline, students would become viable candidates for personnel, human resources and industrial relations positions. Miller was not suggesting that sociology departments or industrial sociologists have absolutely avoided applications. Rather, neither has sufficiently developed such programs to brake the loss of sociology majors to university units that promise more marketable training.

In this paper we propose a macro level model for analyzing the creation of deviance rules. We begin by placing the phenomenon within the context of the social factist and social definitionist sociological traditions, identifying the insights and difficulties the social problems literature presents for explaining deviance rule creation. We suggest that the theoretical difficulties can be resolved by placing the process within a sociology of knowledge framework. The consequent dialectical model of deviance designation is based on the assumption that society is composed of a number of general interests in varying degrees of conflict with prevailing definitions of deviance representing outcomes of previous contests. This balance or accommodation becomes vulnerable with the introduction or increase in strain which is a potential resource for interest groups desiring a new definition. The outcome of the ensuing conflict is seen as dependent on the ability of the combatants to employ resources in the battle. We conclude by identifying the advantages the model has for studying the deviance rule creation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper empirically examines the claim that many theories of deviance only have utility for explaining deviance committed by males because their conceptual development was tainted with inattention to females. Five variables representing the essence of major theories of deviant behavior are measured for a self-report sample of 1993 cases. Each variable is tested to determine how well it can account for deviance among females compared to males. In volume of deviance more males than females were classified as deviant but the underlying processes which the five theoretical variables address operated equally for members of both sexes. These findings support the position that the processes by which females come to commit deviance is similar to the processes for males. The findings suggest that exclusive focus on females is unlikely to yield more adequate explanations of female deviance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most important contributions of recent social problems theory is the insight that social problems are inherently political phenomena. Existing scholarship on this characteristic has not dealt systematically with (1) the degree of overt politicality of social issues, or (2) the dynamic element of this politicality. This paper first reviews recent literature in the "medicalization of deviant behavior," and suggests that this literature illustrates how the political element of social problem phenomena can be suppressed and replaced with a seemingly apolitical and technical perspective. Then it is proposed that interpretive social problems theory might deal more adequately with this pattern by incorporating a continuum ranging from "open" to "closed" social problems and analyzing the dynamics of social problem "enclosure," and that certain sorts of claims—cognitive as opposed to normative—are especially conducive to the depoliticization and enclosure of social problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper makes an initial statement on the importance of the concept of the other in sociology and social psychology and then examines the place this concept plays in the essential thought of Alfred Schutz, G. H. Mead, and C. H. Cooley. It is argued that the concept is not a fundamental part of the thought of Schutz, that it is used merely as a convenient loophole at various strategic moments in the argument, whereas in the work of Mead and Cooley it is conceived as an active and embodied entity that plays a crucial role in their respective theories of socialization and human conduct. The work of the labeling theorists is then taken to illustrate the value of the concept as used by Mead and Cooley, with some changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper first reviews the descriptions and structural explanations for variations, in urban population densities in the United States over several decades. The research reviewed focuses on shifts in the technology and economics of travel as being the major influences on urban density distributions. These variables appear to be somewhat less adequate as explanations of the process in recent decades. After reviewing these findings and suggesting several research questions, we attempt to assess the evidence relating variations in population density to several other aspects of human behavior. A review of the research relating high population densities to various "social pathologies" indicates that little of the variance in rates of these pathologies can be attributed to density independently of other social structural variables. Some important consequences of population density have been reported, however, and possible research directions are outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comparisons of factor analytic results based on a matrix of total (individual) correlations and three matrices of between-groups (ecological) correlations revealed fundamental differences in factor patterns when the unit of analysis shifted from individuals to aggregates. The major difference involved the marked tendency for a highly individualistic General Ability Factor derived from the matrix of total correlations to become more and more sociological in content as individuals were aggregated. Results are discussed in terms of their bearing on the problem of determining the "appropriateness" of a given unit of analysis, individuals vs. aggregates, for certain levels of inquiry, i.e., psychological vs. sociological. It is concluded that whether the researcher should heed the traditional warning about the use of aggregate data relationships as a basis for making inferences concerning individuals ought to depend in part on whether his interest is in psychological or sociological propositions about individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Serious chronic illness undermines the unity between body and self and forces identity changes. To explicate how the body, identity, and self intersect in illness, one mode of living with impairment, adapting, is explicated in this article. Adapting means altering life and self to accommodate to bodily losses and limits and resolving the lost unity between body and self. It means struggling with rather than against illness. The process of adapting consists of three major stages: (1) experiencing and defining impairment, (2) making bodily assessments and, subsequently, identity trade-offs, as ill people weigh their losses and gains and revise their identity goals, and (3) surrendering to the sick self by relinquishing control over illness and by flowing with the experience of it. Adapting seldom occurs only once Rather chronically ill people are forced to adapt repeatedly as they experience new losses. The data consist of 115 interviews about experiencing chronic illness and 25 more focused interviews about the body in chronic illness. The strategies of grounded theory provided the methods for completing the analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One thing is certain, a man might feel: the building of this bridge will never be completed, but my life will surely have its end. A man might therefore risk a running leap from the unfinished edge to the shore that he thinks he sees ahead. Perhaps he has seen right and has estimated his own powers correctly. In which event, applause. Perhaps he has badly miscalculated on both counts. In which event, a certain dampness sets in. Maybe he can swim back to safety, even if somewhat less than applauded. In any event, he has found out how far he can see and how well he can jump. Even if he is never heard from again, perhaps those who are still dawdling at the edge will learn something useful (Gouldner, 1973). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on sanction threat-behavior relationships has suffered because investigators, using cross-sectional data, have failed to meet methodological requirements concerning the causal order of variables and the statistical control of other relevant variables. We estimate several models of a social-control process that meet these requirements, using longitudinal panel data from a sample of 265 adolescents. Our models consider the relationships among an inhibitor (threat of sanction), a generator (peer-group influence), and a measure of deviance (use of marijuana). The results obtained from the best-fitting model indicate that sanction threat does not exert any long-term effects (at least of one year), although there was evidence that it has modest instantaneous effects on deviance. Having marijuana-using friends has the greatest effect on marijuana use. The pattern of coefficients suggests that peers may initially be selected because of their deviant conduct, and that once chosen, they exert independent generative (or causative) influence on deviance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several issues in the study of deviance are discussed: the definition of deviance; the significance of the deviant act; cultural relativism; the influence of social structures and causation. By using departures from rules to define deviance, sociologists may repeat fallacies of formalistic jurisprudence. Deviance is best left undefined, and preferably delimited ontologically in terms of middle range theory. Spector and Kitsuse's revisionist theory is judged insufficient for macro-analysis of deviance because they fail to reconcile the influence of objective and subjective factors. Cottrell's choice and feedback model is advocated as a means to study the dynamic process wherein values are aggregated in the social definition of deviance. The problem of bringing objective factors into this analysis is solved by showing how changing costs alter the order in which values are satisfied and thus change the overt pattern of societal reaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ritzer (1975) suggests that biological explanation may emerge as a new paradigm in sociology but incipient work in this area has not had much impact on the discipline. Some forms of biological explanation seem sociologically trivial, but at least three forms of explanation common in the discipline of biology have meaningful homologues in sociology: (1) species-wide human behavior may be explained as the result of biological evolution; (2) behavioral differences between humans, or between groups of humans, may be explained by genetic differences between the individuals or groups; and, (3) social interaction may be explained neurophysiologically in terms of organ systems, nerve impulses, hormones, etc. Each of these forms of biological explanation is meaningful in a sociological context, but each has severe limitations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The failure of the labeling perspective to account for informal reaction processes is noted. Viewing informal labeling in terms of emergence and the documentary method, definitional processes are divided into two categories: (1) intra-situational definitions concerning the practical problems of negotiating an interactional encounter, and (2) frans-situational definitions in which the actor is evaluated in terms of cultural knowledge and prior experience. A repeated measures experimental study is discussed which indicates that intra-situational and trans-situational definitions are differentially responsive to variations over time in the typicality of an actor's behavior. Implications for the concept of "aligning actions" are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the publication of Taylor, Walton and Young's New Criminology (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972 and New York: Harper Torch Books, 1974), the Quarterly asked Anthony Platt, Richard Quinney and Paul Rock to write reviewessays which were subsequently published in the Quarterly in the Autumn 1973 issue. These reviews elicited the following response by Stephen Mugford. It was circulated to the authors of the New Criminology. who declined to comment, choosing to formulate a general response to the many review comments the book has generated. Mugford's comment was also sent to the original reviewers, and Paul Rock's reply follows. The editor would like to encourage such free interchange, and will attempt to facilitate comment by circulating manuscripts and soliciting commentary. (Perhaps a format similar to that employed by Current Anthropology will emerge). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]