Search

This special issue of Information, Communication, and Society (ICS) is edited by the Communication, Information Technologies, and Media Sociology (CITAMS) section of the American Sociological Association and includes papers that were first presented at either the 2021 or 2022 ASA meetings or Media Sociology Symposia. For this special issue, an innovative editorial approach was taken that brought the editing process into a graduate classroom. That process is described below along with a brief introduction to themes of the selected articles. Key themes for this special issue include content analysis, ethics, privacy, new economy, and digital inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer review is a central institution in academic publishing, yet its processes and effects on research remain opaque. Empirical studies have (1) been rare because data on the peer review process are generally unavailable, and (2) conceptualized peer review as gate-keepers who either accept or reject a manuscript, overlooking peer review's role in constructing articles. This study uses a unique data resource to study how sociological manuscripts change during peer review. Authors of published sociological research often present earlier versions of that research at annual meetings of the American Sociological Association (ASA). Many of these annual meetings papers are publicly available online and tend to be uploaded before undergoing formal peer review. A data sample is constructed by linking these papers to the respective versions published between 2006 and 2012 in two peer-reviewed journals, American Sociological Review and Social Forces. Quantitative and qualitative analyses examine changes across article versions, paying special attention to how elements of data analysis and theory in the ASA versions change. Results show that manuscripts tend to change more substantially in their theoretical framing than in the data analyses. The finding suggests that a chief effect of peer review in quantitative sociology is to prompt authors to adjust their theoretical framing, a mode or review I call 'data-driven.' The data-driven mode of review problematizes the vision of sociological research as addressing theoretically motivated questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discussions on inequality have traditionally focused on an economic perspective, centering around how the unequal distribution of wealth or resources impacts the life chances of different groups of people, and how it leads to social segregation, polarization or fragmentation. The explanatory power and influences as such remain to this day. Recently, however, some scholars have tried to investigate inequality from an angle of institutional culture. The author examined the presidential addresses of the American Sociological Association over the past 20 years, and found that at least five of them dealt with inequality through culturalist lens, which indicated the relevance of cultural forces to inequality. This paper synthesized their arguments into 'categorization and classification systems of otherness' and 'effects of childrearing/parenting'. The preliminary finding shows that 'categorization and classification systems of otherness' are the main mechanism of social inequality, while 'effects of childrearing/parenting' act as latent factors behind most educational inequality. In this study, the former are explicated from two dimensions, namely, cultural foundation and institutional operation, and the latter from cultural knowledge and cultural guides. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current period of disruptive social change is inextricably bound up with new means and modes of communication, information, and media streams. The Communication, Information Technologies & Media Sociology section of the American Sociological Association (CITAMS) locates these factors at the center of our collective interests, investigating them through a plethora of methods, theories, and empirical cases. Each year, CITAMS runs a special issue in ICS showcasing select works presented at the previous year's American Sociological Association conference and the affiliated Media Sociology preconference. Papers in the 2022 CITAMS Special Issue reflect a social context defined by a prolonged global pandemic and wrought by democratic uncertainty. Across these social circumstances, technology and media loom large. Simultaneously, everyday life continues and classic CITAMS scholarship sustains relevance for the ways people interact, construct identity, consume, and mobilize. All of this and more are contained in the pages of this year's Special Issue, from which readers can get a sense of what CITAMS has to offer and consider how their own work may fit within the broad CITAMS umbrella. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents guidelines for submitting various types of manuscripts and ancillary materials to the American Sociological Association's journal "Teaching Sociology."

This article is an adaptation of the sixteenth Lewis A. Coser lecture, given virtually in 2021 for the American Sociological Association Meetings. In this article, I pay tribute to Lewis and Rose Laub Coser by engaging with their past work, which inspired a theoretical provocation about what it means to theorize from the margins. I specifically address the questions of who gets to be a theorist and what kinds of theoretical work get marginalized. I outline the process of epistemic oppression involved in trying to publish marginal ideas in mainstream journals. I argue that the relationship between mainstream sociology and what I refer to as "marginal" requires a relational perspective that (1) situates both marginalized scholars and their scholarship in the broader discipline of sociology and (2) examines the epistemic oppression of their theories regardless of their sometimes-powerful institutional positioning in highly ranked departments or as leaders within various professional associations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Erving Goffman's written legacy bears on sociology as a whole, or so he argued in his Presidential Address to the American Sociological Association (Goffman, 1983). However, while being celebrated as important to the discipline, his work is also interpreted in inconsistent ways, often downplayed or marginalized, and even neglected. This paper claims that Goffman's "well known aversion to self-disclosure" (Shalin, 2013) does not justify overlooking his trajectory, from the unknown "margins" of a Canadian small town to the elusive "center" of American sociology—and much less does it justify still circulating assessments of his personality, crafted while overlooking his life experiences—and, especially, his writings. Anecdotal evidence of his "enigmatic" personality (Lemert, 2003), or "bad-boy outrageousness" (Berger, 1986), works as a derailing tactic, leading to unwarranted appraisals of Goffman's personality—and, more importantly, to the neglect of crucial aspects of his work. From a theoretical standpoint, Simmel's treatment of "the stranger" as a social relationship, and Merton's concept of "moral alchemy", are used here to try to make some sense of the mixture of celebration and neglect still surrounding "Goffman". Historical data was gathered in part from the "Erving Goffman Archives'' (Shalin, 2013). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the intellectual benefits and lessons learned from a symposium for junior sociology scholars, sponsored by sponsored by the History of Sociology (HoS) Section of the American Sociological Association (ASA), at the New School for Social Research on August 10, 2013. Among the lessons learned are the need for long-term perspective in decision making, little money for food, and flexibility in the exclusion and inclusion of criteria for participation. Information on papers submitted for the symposium, including on sociology, social change, and the work of sociologist W. I. Thomas, is also presented.

Professional organizations all exist in resource niches and, over time, confront varying degrees of density and, hence, competition with other organizations. The initial founding and growth, the precipitous decline, and the subsequent revitalization of the Pacific Sociological Association over the last six decades can be analyzed from an ecological perspective, suggesting strategies for the further survival of PSA in an every more dense resource niche. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In summer, 1976 Norm Denzin and Norb Wiley acted, as a Symbolic Interactionist lobby, to try to get a more centrist, middle-of-the-road editor for the American Sociological Review. We wanted one who could represent female epistemology, which is less narrow than that of males. We also wanted a female as editor She would be the first female ASR editor. So it was a gender lobby as well as Symbolic Interactionist. Wiley attended the American Sociological Association Council meeting where this issue was discussed. We wanted to formally state our position in an address to the ASA Council. The ASA Secretary, Bill Form, attempted to keep us off the agenda, and we needed a vote from the Council approving our inclusion. This paper describes the fight at the meeting between Bill Form and Wiley, along with comments from the Council members. The lobby got the required votes and Wiley gave the prepared statement. As a consequence we did get a female editor (Rita Simon). And we promoted the issue of how representative the American Sociological Review and the other sociology journals should be. Later Wiley continued to promote social theory, and Denzin achieved several important accomplishments toward broadening and democratizing the field of sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been common for studies presented as about American sociology as a whole to rely on data compiled from leading journals ( American Sociological Review [ASR] and American Journal of Sociology [AJS]), or about presidents of the American Sociological Association [ASA], to represent it. Clearly those are important, but neither can be regarded as providing a representative sample of American sociology. Recently, Stephen Turner has suggested that dominance in the ASA rests with a 'cartel' initially formed in graduate school, and that it favors work in a style associated with the leading journals. The adequacy of these ideas is examined in the light of available data on the last 20 years, which show that very few of the presidents were in the same graduate schools at the same time. All presidents have had distinguished academic records, but it is shown that their publication strategies have varied considerably. Some have had no ASR publications except their presidential addresses, while books and large numbers of other journals not normally mentioned in this context have figured in their contributions, as well as being more prominent in citations. It seems clear that articles in the leading journals have not been as closely tied to prestigious careers as has sometimes been suggested, and that if there is a cartel it has not included all the presidents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Jane Sell’s contributions to social psychology include guides to theory building, experimental methods, public goods, prosocial interaction, gender, race, and status processes. She serves on committees and panels at the American Sociological Association (ASA), the ASA Social Psychology Section, and the National Science Foundation. Her doctoral students attest to her wise and patient guidance, and she continues to enrich social psychology through her research, her service, and her many students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American Sociological Association (ASA) used social science research and data informed approaches to engage community college faculty in the discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Double-blind peer review is a central feature of the editorial model of most journals in sociology and neighboring social scientific fields, yet there is little history of how and when its main features developed. Drawing from nearly 70 years of annual reports of the editors of American Sociological Association journals, this article describes the historical emergence of major elements of editorial peer review. These reports and associated descriptive statistics are used to show that blind review, ad hoc review, the formal requirement of exclusive submission, routine use of the revise and resubmit decision, and common use of desk rejection developed separately over a period of decades. The article then argues that the ongoing evolution of the review model has not been driven by intellectual considerations. Rather, the evolution of peer review is best understood as the product of continuous efforts to steward editors' scarce attention while preserving an open submission policy that favors authors' interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Qualitative coding procedures emanating from grounded theory were limited by technologies of the 1960s: colored pens, scissors, and index cards. Today, electronic documents can be flexibly stored, retrieved, and cross-referenced using qualitative data analysis (QDA) software. We argue the oft-cited grounded theory framework poorly fits many features of contemporary sociological interview studies, including large samples, coding by teams, and mixed-method analysis. The grounded theory approach also hampers transparency and does not facilitate reanalysis or secondary analysis of interview data. We begin by summarizing grounded theory's assumptions about coding and analysis. We then analyze published articles from American Sociological Association flagship journals, demonstrating that current conventions for semistructured interview studies depart from the grounded theory framework. Based on experience analyzing interview data, we suggest steps in data organization and analysis to better utilize QDA technology. Our goal is to support rigorous, transparent, and flexible analysis of in-depth interview data. We end by discussing strengths and limitations of our twenty-first-century approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the meeting of the American Sociological Association (ASA) to take place in Chicago, Illinois in August 2015.

In the curricula of colleges and universities in North America, the discipline of sociology is a relative newcomer. During scarcely more than a century since the founding of the first American degree programs in sociology, little agreement has emerged over what sociology actually is or does. Rather than regard this dizzying diversity as a source of confusion and consternation, though, might we ponder what would happen to us and our efforts if, instead, we were to view the many forms and aims of contemporary sociology as an irreplaceable advantage, and the practical pluralism that surrounds us in our work as a font of riches, embarrassing or not? Would not multiple visions thus be engaged at once? Could we not at last proceed, as the Beatles urged us, "all together now"? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the peripheral position and future of historical consciousness in sociology. While many sociologists consider meta-historical research to be purposeless and self-indulgent, I argue that preserving the historical imagination can improve sociology by fostering disciplinary coherence, avoiding intellectual regurgitation, and understanding the previous intellectual battles out of which current scientific discourse came. Despite these advantages, meta-historical knowledge is severely undervalued in contemporary sociology and, as I demonstrate by presenting data from both the American Sociological Association (ASA) and department websites, such knowledge will likely continue to dissipate more than it already has. Some scholars have taken note of the current lack of historical curiosity in sociology, though this observation has only been grounded in impression. For this reason, this article provides this impression with an empirical basis, and presents indicative support for the expectation that historical consciousness will further deteriorate in sociology's future. This unpromising future for the history of sociology has received little attention in recent discourse, though this article gives reason for sociologists to deliberate over the potential consequences that would come along with the continued withering of historical consciousness. Disciplinary implications concerning the death of the historical imagination are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 has focused global attention on disease spread across borders. But how has research on infectious and noncommunicable disease figured into the sociological imagination historically, and to what degree has American medical sociology examined health problems beyond U.S. borders? Our 35-year content analysis of 2,588 presentations in the American Sociological Association's (ASA) Section on Medical Sociology and 922 articles within the section's official journal finds less than 15 percent of total research examined contexts outside the United States. Research on three infectious diseases in the top eight causes of death in low-income countries (diarrheal disease, malaria, and tuberculosis [TB]) and emerging diseases—Ebola, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)—was nearly absent, as was research on major noncommunicable diseases. Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS) received much more focus, although world regions hit hardest received scant attention. Interviews suggest a number of factors shape geographic foci of research, but this epistemic parochialism may ultimately impoverish sociological understanding of illness and disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides a critique and an addition to observations raised by Ballantine et al. in this issue. After reviewing the strengths of Ballantine et al.’s article about the need for a core in sociology, I argue that this debate has gone on long enough and needs to be reframed around areas of agreement. Three major curricular projects (that have already begun to move this discussion forward) are presented, including the American Sociological Association (ASA) High School National Standards; the ASA Task Force on Liberal Learning and the Sociology Major, Updated, Third Edition; and the Measuring College Learning (MCL) Project. A critical outcome of the MCL Project in sociology is the Sociological Literacy Framework, which is already changing conversations about sociology curricula and learning outcomes. The Sociological Literacy Framework is summarized, and use of this framework is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews the history of the Communication and Information Technologies section of the American Sociological Association (CITASA), and discusses its current research emphases and future trajectory. Critically, the article argues that CITASA has become the preeminent point of reconnection between sociology and communication, allowing cross-pollination of ideas in the study of digital media, and increasingly in the study of media more broadly. The article also discusses contemporary research emphases involving computational and programming-intensive research, research on the use and effects of digital tools, and research on communication and media broadly understood. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Faculty members in tenure-track positions must demonstrate proficiency in teaching and scholarship, although different types of higher education institutions carry different sets of expectations and requirements in these areas. Teacher-scholars, who integrate teaching and research through diverse means, largely work at teaching focused institutions. Even in such teaching-focused institutions, however, there has been a growing demand for faculty to have high levels of scholarly productivity, typically in the form of peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations...At the same time, teacher-scholars, due to limited resources, do not have great access to national conferences, leading them to rely more heavily on regional conferences to display their scholarly work. This study examines the utility of regional associations in meeting the career needs of teacher-scholars. Examining conference programs from the Pacific Sociological Association for five recent years, and comparing them to the national conference (the American Sociological Association) we show that teacher-scholars rely heavily on regional conferences to highlight their successes, often extending beyond scholarship. Regional conferences also offer a more flexible program than the national conference for defining the work of teacher-scholars. While teacher-scholars and Ph.D. granting faculty alike engage at both the national and regional conferences, both conferences tend to perpetuate a hierarchy of academia that emphasizes more traditional standards of scholarly success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the meanings of racism in the sociology of race/ethnicity and provides a descriptive framework for comparing theories of racism. The authors argue that sociologists use racism to refer to four constructs: (1) individual attitudes, (2) cultural schema, and two constructs associated with structural racism: (3) preexisting consequential inequalities, that is, racial dominance, and (4) processes that create or maintain racial dominance. The article compares this framework with a content and citation analysis of 1,037 sociology journal articles published from 1995 to 2015, a period stretching from a major call to renew sociological attention to racism, to the founding of the American Sociological Association journal, Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. The authors find six communities organized around distinctive citations and using different meanings of racism. They conclude by pushing toward the question of what racism ought to mean by discussing the implications for both sociological research and public sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the New Voices Initiative for the history of sociology in the U.S. that was formulated during the 2019 American Sociological Association (ASA) Annual Meeting in New York. Topics include the relevance of the history of sociology discipline to academic sociology, the views of early career scholars about the history of sociology as a risky proposition for significant intellectual investment, and an overview of the conception of the New Voices Initiative. Also discussed are the opportunities and needs surrounding sociology's history.

Each year the Communication, Information Technologies, and Media Sociology section of the American Sociological Association curates a special issue highlighting sociological contributions to technology and media studies. That tradition continued in 2020, even as everything else changed. The articles included in this year's special issue were mostly written pre-Pandemic, yet their implications seem amplified by the current historical moment. With a globe gone remote, mediated communication rose from a specialist academic subject to an acute social consideration, intersecting with and illuminating basic sociological concerns about inequality, the nature of work, family life, and the compounding effects of race, class, gender, and sexuality as they interplay with social and material conditions. These topics are all reflected in the articles from this year's issue, now inflected with a post-Pandemic reality that shows insights from CITAMS are needed now, more than ever. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on a peer-reviewed digital teaching resources library TRAILS, developed by the American Sociological Association (ASA), which provides sociology teachers with access to teaching resources. It features resources including syllabi, assignments and class activities. Assignments include “Give Methods a Chance Paper" by Riku Kawaguchi and “LGBTQ Environmental Assessment Worksheet" by Jason Lee Crockett.

This article expands on my presidential address to further bolster the case that sociology has, from its inception, been engaged in social justice. I argue that a critical review of our discipline and our Association's vaunted empiricist tradition of objectivity, in which sociologists are detached from their research, was accomplished by a false history and sociology of sociology that ignored, isolated, and marginalized some of the founders. In the past half-century, scholar-activists, working-class sociologists, sociologists of color, women sociologists, indigenous sociologists, and LGBTQ sociologists have similarly been marginalized and discouraged from pursuing social justice issues and applied research within our discipline. Being ignored by academic sociology departments has led them to create or join homes in interdisciplinary programs and other associations that embrace applied and scholar-activist scholarship. I offer thoughts about practices that the discipline and Association should use to reclaim sociology's social justice tradition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article updates and expands upon Difuccia et al. (American Sociologist, 38(1), 3-22, DiFuccia et al. 2007), which asked whether, during the first decade of the twenty-first century, sociology in the United States was shifting from a male-dominated discipline and educational enterprise to one controlled for the first time by the persons and interests of women. We expanded the parameters of the study and enriched the data in order to draw more exacting conclusions. Our analyses show that during the last dozen years, a very substantial shift has indeed occurred. Most graduate students and assistant and associate professors at the most prestigious doctoral-granting institutions are now female. With this switch has come a change in the substantive focus of sociology. Curricula at the graduate level are being modified to accommodate interests more typically female than male (as measured by the sex-composition of specialty sections of the American Sociological Association). We find that "female interests" similarly predominate in current sociology dissertations, suggesting that the intellectual changes associated with sociology's demographic shift are likely to persist. A correlated change is also apparent in ASA leadership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, I discuss the ways in which a national organization like the American Sociological Association can fight against government policies that threaten conditions essential for knowledge production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]