Search

In this paper, I focus on two thinkers who I contend can be read as Du Boisian sociologists: Franklin Frazier and John Gibbs St. Clair Drake. I argue that both Frazier and Drake are often (mis)represented as being ethnographic sociologists of racism in the American inner city who owe their intellectual training and lineage to the Chicago School. By contrast, I argue that Frazier and Drake, while interested in race in the American inner city, both viewed American racism as only one piece in a global jigsaw puzzle; both advocated for comparative and historical sociologies of race and empire which would highlight—to quote Frazier (1973, 339)—that although racism “in the United States has many unique features, it is […] a phase of a world process.” Excavating this world process, to both Frazier and Drake, necessarily entailed studying the global color line beyond its expression only in the United States. Frazier and Drake ought to be read, therefore, primarily as Du Boisian sociologists, not simply as parochial ethnographers of the inner city. The data for this paper come from the Du Bois, Frazier, and Drake papers housed in archives at the University of Massachusetts‐Amherst, Howard University, and the Schomburg Centre. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Excerpted from my book Generally Speaking, this paper introduces "concept‐driven sociology," a special way of theorizing designed to reveal abstract social patterns. As such, it examines the methodological process by which we can "distill" generic patterns from the culturally, historically, and situationally specific contexts in which we encounter them. It thus champions a "generic sociology" that is pronouncedly transcontextual (transcultural, transhistorical, transsituational, and translevel) in its scope. In order to uncover generic, transcontextual social patterns, we need to collect our data in a wide range of social contexts. Such contextual diversity is manifested multi‐culturally, multihistorically, multisituationally, as well as at multiple levels of social aggregation. True to its message, the book illustrates generic social patterns by drawing on numerous examples from diverse cultural contexts and historical periods and a wide range of diverse social domains, as well as by disregarding scale. Emphasizing cross‐contextual commonality, concept‐driven sociology tries to reveal formal "parallels" across seemingly disparate contexts. The paper features the four main types of cross‐contextual analogies concept‐driven sociologists tend to use—cross‐cultural, cross‐historical, cross‐domain, as well as cross‐level—disregarding conventionally noted substantive differences in order to note conventionally disregarded formal equivalences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociologists have long been interested in the meaning workers derive from their jobs. The issue has garnered increasing academic and policy attention in recent years with the concept of "meaningful work," yet little is known about how social stratification relates to access to it. This paper addresses this issue by exploring how the meaningfulness of jobs—as rated by their incumbents—is stratified across classes and occupations in a national survey of 14,000 working adults in the United Kingdom. It finds modest differentials between classes, with those in routine and manual occupations reporting the lowest levels of meaningfulness and those in managerial and professional occupations and small employers and own account workers reporting the highest levels. Detailed job attributes (e.g., job complexity and development opportunities) explain much of the differences in meaningfulness between classes and occupations, and much of the overall variance in meaningfulness. The main exception is the specific case of how useful workers perceive their jobs to be for society: A handful of occupations relating to health, social care, and protective services which cut across classes stand out from all other occupations. The paper concludes that the modest stratification between classes and occupations in meaningful work is largely due to disparities in underlying job complexity and development opportunities. The extent to which these aspects of work can be improved, and so meaningfulness, especially in routine and manual occupations, is an open, yet urgent, question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The discipline is at a crossroads. Will sociology answer ASA past president Aldon Morris' call for an emancipatory sociology? Or will sociology, as Morris puts it, "continue pretending to be an aloof, objective, detached science"? Recently, Hirschman and Garbes issued a call for an economic sociology of race, wherein they contend that race and racism are not central to economic sociology and that economic sociologists don't engage with contemporary race scholarship. In this paper, I assess and build upon their call. I argue that while the article importantly calls for understanding race and racism in economic sociology, in practice, it—used here as an example of a broader pattern within economic sociology—re‐centers whiteness and men, reifies elitism, and erases marginalized scholars and their contributions. I set forth an alternative perspective. To rise to the Du Boisian challenge, scholars need to critique racialized modernity as Itzigsohn and Brown importantly argue. We must also root our sociological consciousness, citation practices, and conversations in existing, yet marginalized, research. Failure to do so means future research risks reproducing inequities in the discipline and continuing to marginalize the very people, theories, and research that an emancipatory sociology is meant to address. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an invitation to feminist and queer sociology to engage more frequently, enthusiastically, and deeply with animals. Feminist and queer sociology that attend to animals and animality stand to develop better knowledge for animals and animal studies and for women, queers, and feminist and queer sociology. Sociologists working from feminist and queer perspectives are also particularly well‐positioned within the discipline of sociology to contribute to and take advantage of the insights of the field of feminist animal studies. After a brief review of what feminist animal studies is, I proceed through three steps to elaborate the imperative for feminist and queer sociology to consider animals. First, I show how feminist animal studies as a theoretical perspective engages with issues that are core to feminist and queer sociology. Second, I center intersectional feminism and lay out how incorporating species can and does enhance our understanding of intersectional processes. Third, I present an ethical call, grounded in the traditions of feminist ethics and ecofeminism, to attend to species in feminist and queer sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociologists tend to see G. H. Mead's conceptualization of self as fundamentally correct. In this paper, we develop a critique of Mead's notion of the self as constituted through social interactions. Our focus will be on Mead's categorial distinction between the socially constructed self and subjective experience, as well as on the tendency of post‐Meadian sociologists to push Mead's position in ever more radical directions. Drawing inspiration from a multifaceted understanding of selfhood that can be found in Husserlian phenomenology, we then propose that the most basic level of selfhood is anchored in irreducible subjective experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes why child film star series produced by major French production companies (Pathé, Gaumont, Eclectic, and Éclair) in the early 1900s (Bébé, Bout‐de‐Zan, Willy, and the Maria Fromet series) were received with such interest by global audiences. This period, prior to World War I, was a brief era when French cinema held significant hegemony worldwide, before Hollywood's dominance began. There are ideas suggesting that child film stars emerged with American cinema. Contrary to this, however, French producers competed fiercely in the 10 years following 1906, producing series featuring child film stars. Substantial budgets were allocated for the marketing of these series, ultimately gaining a considerable fan base not only in Europe but also in America. When examining these film stars from the early 20th century within their historical context, they emerge as the first international child stars with international fame and financial success, unlike child musicians, vaudeville artists, and theater actors from the 18th and 19th centuries. Inspired by the field analysis of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, this article aims to establish a connection between the struggles within the field and the symbolic needs of the audience as reflected in the content of child star films. The films were viewed at the Eye Film Museum archive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The trajectory of the academic discipline of sociology is an attestation to the quest for civility and sociability. We believe that the promise of public sociology will rejuvenate scholars to commit to better engagement with one another and with the public. We situate and draw from the scholarly contributions of Michael Burawoy to reflect on sociology's longstanding critical imagination, hoping that the world could be different. We place ourselves on the continuum of what is and what ought to be for better lived experiences and a sustainable planet. We draw from the work of sociologists in India, which continues to guide us to amplify the voices of the unheard and the issues of public concern. To be inclusive, sustainable, democratic, and humane, we need to move beyond structurally ingrained processes within academia and make bridges that are open to all. The deliberation furthered in this paper will encourage young scholars to be more concerned for engaging multiple publics and, thereby, help the discipline of sociology itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the Chicago sociologist William F. Ogburn's (1886–1959) views about technological unemployment, which were intimately connected to his analysis of the social impacts of technological developments and resulting social problems due to cultural lag. We trace the development of his views as seen through his well‐known 1922 book, Social Change with Respect to Culture and Original Nature, his important contributions to the President's Research Committee on Social Trends (1933), and his lesser‐known pamphlets designed for a broader audience—Living with Machines (1933), You and Machines (1934), and Machines and Tomorrow's World (1938). He used these pamphlets to educate the public about the dangers of new machines and technological unemployment. In doing so, he drew upon sociological analysis in his professional scholarly writings and his long‐standing personal interests in social betterment and social reform. Our analysis also calls into question the adequacy of existing scholarship on Ogburn that has emphasized his commitment to a statistical, dispassionate, and "objectivist" approach to social science research. We call for a revised, richer, and more complex view of Ogburn's work and legacy as one of the nation's leading social scientists during the first half of the 20th century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociology has long been interested in innovating solutions to social problems. However, this desire has also been a source of controversy as it can conflict with the discipline's ambition also to be recognized as a hard science. This paper critically reviews sociological contributions to the study of social innovation. It first contextualizes these contributions by discussing the origins of sociology's interest in transforming society, the growing tension between that interest and sociology's other aspiration to create objective knowledge about the social world, and how more sociologists have relocated to business schools where most research on social innovation is now being conducted. Next, it summarizes sociologists' contributions, which emphasize how social innovation is organized by institutions, networks, social movements, and organizations themselves. It then discusses criticisms of this work and responses to these critiques. It concludes by asking whether sociologists' research on social innovation has advanced their discipline's dual mission of reforming and explaining society and what additional studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Du Bois is often regarded as an important scholar for his contributions to the development of sociology. However, less is known about his work in developing interactionist thought. This essay is an introduction to this special issue, and a small attempt to acknowledge the work of scholars of color within the interactionist tradition. The Du Bosian approach to sociology has for too long been dismissed out of hand. Scholars pursuing new areas of inquiry, topics outside the bounds of "mainstream sociology," are often met with fierce resistance—even today. Instead of building these scholars up, through mentorship and aid, so‐called "accomplished" scholars see fit to tear down the work of those not like them. The Du Bosian perspective celebrates the plurality of voices, advocates for mentorship, and sees sociological inquiry as rooted in the real needs and concerns of those so marginalized. As this collection of articles illustrates, even when conforming to scientific standards work in this tradition has a political dimension as it lays bare the inequities in society—even, at times, drawing government interference with their work. This issue also calls upon professional sociologists to reflect on the ways they reproduce these patterns within the discipline and higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, sociologists have lamented the fact that interdisciplinary exchange regarding Culture and Cognition has been largely asymmetrical. However, to date, no sociologist has empirically established the degree of interdisciplinary diffusion of Culture and Cognition scholarship. We add empirical detail to these discussions through a bibliographic analysis of 16 key Culture and Cognition articles, analyzing their citation patterns both within and beyond Sociology. Within Sociology, we find that citations of Culture and Cognition scholarship tend to cluster within culture, generalist, and theory journals. In terms of interdisciplinary diffusion, we find that while engagement with Culture and Cognition scholarship is indeed concentrated within sociology, almost half of the citations of this work come from other disciplines. This suggests that, while not entirely incorrect, the characterizations of Culture and Cognition's interdisciplinary uptake have been somewhat exaggerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors show that for most groups there is an impressive income mobility between parents and children, and this is not a matter of the second generations having nominally higher income but remaining as poor in relative terms as the immigrants. The Chetty-Hendren team has pioneered analyses of intergenerational income mobility in which individuals are scored by their percentile rank in a national distribution (e.g., Chetty et al. [2]), and Abramitzky and Boustan follow this model. Abramitzky and Boustan mention in passing economist Claudia Goldin's finding that the income returns to schooling were unusually low in 1940. The Opportunity Insights data for this part of their analysis are much more credible than the problematic data undergirding the analysis of the early twentieth century - the income data and the parent-child linkages have been constructed from income-tax returns and can draw on social-security numbers. [Extracted from the article]

Matteo Bortolini, an Italian sociologist at the University of Padua, has written the definitive biography of the American sociologist Robert Neelly Bellah (1927-2013). (Bellah's review of archived records in 2004 did not change his judgment of the Harvard administration; Parsons, in contrast, had championed Bellah in a "forceful, uncompromising way" [pp. 317-318].) Bortolini quips that Bill Clinton, who awarded the National Humanities Medal to Bellah in 2000, was apparently "fonder of Robert Bellah than Bob was of the president's centrist policies" (p. 295). [Extracted from the article]

Sociologists of the family have established that U.S. laws play a fundamental role in shaping the outcomes of family members. This article builds on this work by examining how immigration law is instrumental to the family formation processes of contemporary Latino/a immigrant families. Drawing on insights from sociology of the family and immigrant incorporation literature, I argue that immigration laws aid in the creation of family typologies among Latino/a immigrants. This argument is supported by providing a historical overview of key federal immigration laws that affect Latino/a immigrant families and a discussion of five Latino/a immigrant family typologies: citizen/lawful permanent resident families, transnational families, separated families, mixed‐status families, and undocumented families. This article concludes with implications for scholars, students, and policymakers on how laws can be used to create harm but can also undo harm against immigrant families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Abd al‐Rahman Ibn Khaldun (1332‐1406), the founder of the science of society, became known to modern sociologists during the formative period of sociology, that is, the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. There was something of a reception of Ibn Khaldun in Europe at that time by sociologists and other scholars who were not necessarily involved with Islamic or West Asian studies. In fact, the reception of Ibn Khaldun by modern scholars in the West can be differentiated into Eurocentric or Orientalist as opposed to more disciplinary attitudes. While much has been said about the Eurocentric reception of Ibn Khaldun, less is discussed about the disciplinary approach to Ibn Khaldun among thinkers who wrote when the modern science of sociology was emerging in Europe. This special issue on Ibn Khaldun in the Formative Period of Sociology provides English translations of six articles originally written in Italian, French, German, Polish, Spanish and Turkish between 1896 and 1934. Not all of these articles were written by sociologists. Together, they provide some background as to how Ibn Khaldun was conceived of in non‐area studies circles, in the social sciences and humanities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gangs are geographically oriented social entities as evidenced by the display of cardinal points in their graffiti, the use of neighborhood namesakes, a focus on territoriality as their raison d'être, as well as in the way they are policed and legally cordoned. Despite gang members' real and imagined penchant for transgressive place‐making and demarcation, it has been sociologists and criminologists, not geographers, who have produced the lion's share of spatially nuanced research on gangs. In this article, I provide a review of the social scientific literature on gangs, concluding with a call for how to make the discipline of geography more inclusive for gang researchers who possess real‐world experience with assertive place‐making practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Encountering the unprecedented social crisis of COVID‐19, an increasing number of sociologists are calling for historical sociology to engage empirically with the dynamics of the COVID‐19 crisis. I present the "path dependence method" and the "temporal connections" to interpret social life during the COVID‐19 pandemic. By using the path dependence method, I show how the personal, social, and national problems created by the COVID‐19 crisis initiate a new path and furthermore how this newly created path is justified in a society. Through the temporal connections, I will show how non‐Western countries responded more reasonably and quickly than most Western countries to the COVID‐19 crisis. The overall aim of this research is to disclose effectiveness of historical sociology, to encourage researchers to think time variable, and to argue that linking historical‐sociological knowledge to the COVID‐19 crisis would be a positive step for an in‐depth COVID‐19 sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, a burgeoning literature finds cultural sociologists incorporating ideas from the cognitive sciences—cognitive anthropology, cognitive psychology, linguistics, neuroscience, and philosophy——and significantly reshaping sociologists' approach to culture, both theoretically and methodologically. Elsewhere, we have reviewed the cognitive turn in cultural sociology (Cerulo, Leschziner and Shepherd, 2021). But in this special issue, authors capitalize on new directions in culture and cognition, providing 12 original articles that forward new theoretical ideas, offer novel methodologies, provide exciting empirical tests of current theories, and suggest possible applications of the culture and cognition lens to other sub‐disciplines in sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociologists agree that there is something cultural that exists within individuals, in interactions, and in objects. And yet the process through which the culture inside individuals interacts with the culture outside of them is only partially understood and is generally untested. Relying on a novel quasi‐experimental design, we investigate how the culture within individuals, interactions, and objects operates in the making of shared meanings. First, we find that cultural schemas set a baseline for shared meanings of objects. Second, we find that shared meanings are also made through interactions, and more vociferously between individuals with shared schemas. Third, we find that objects encoded with meanings set a higher baseline in interpretive clarity than more ambiguous objects. Lastly, we find that schema similarity and interactions jointly lead to greater shared meanings for more ambiguous objects, suggesting that individuals within groups work rapidly toward generating institutionalized and objectified meanings for objects when those assigned meanings do not yet exist. Findings begin to uncover the routine mechanisms of shared meaning creation, pointing toward new empirical frontiers in culture and cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]