Search

The term 'pure sociology' reflects some of the most important disciplinary concerns that have helped shape the intellectual development of sociology in the United States, particularly in the effort to establish disciplinary boundaries and achieve academic legitimacy. To flesh out the thesis, the current paper recounts briefly the early discussions associated with pure sociology before examining the various usages in the U.S. since the establishment of the discipline. While selected classical theorists employed the concept in framing their discussions, pure sociology represents a distinctively American idiom. The etymological history coincides with the institutionalization of sociology in U.S. universities, while informing key debates about the nature of sociological analysis throughout the past 120 years. Drawing upon an electronic search of multiple databases, a content analysis highlights the prevalence of the different meanings that mainly U.S. social scientists have attached to the concept. The paper then traces the varying trajectories of the many different usages over time, concluding with a discussion of the ascendance of Donald Black's theoretical paradigm that has appropriated the term with considerable success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individuals are claiming greater scope for choice in their racial identities. But how they are seen and classified by others is not necessarily changing in a similar way. Racial appraisals are the way that people classify the race of others, both particular individuals and larger groups. In this paper, I make a case for the study of racial appraisals as a field of sociological inquiry. I map out the different analytical levels and methodological approaches for this field and discuss how these can be used to understand observed race, norms of racial classification, and societal norms of the racial order. I present an example of how societal norms and logics of racial classification can be analysed in real time through survey research, using 2015-16 data on 866 White Americans’ reactions to Rachel Doležal’s racial identity claims. I present an agenda for studying changes in racial boundaries and classification norms through the longitudinal tracking of racial appraisals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Submitting articles to journals has become a difficult and time-consuming process, as has reviewing and re-reviewing articles that too often get the dreaded R&R letter. The underlying problem here is as old as the discipline, particularly in American sociology. Very different criteria are used in producing scholarship and reviewing its merits for publication; and current ways of editing journals aggravate this fundamental problem. The Big Divide in sociology is between a discipline that seeks to be a science and one that does not; and there is no easy reconciliation among those on either side of this divide. In this paper, the effects of this divide on journal publishing are reviewed in terms of the consequences of the Big Divide for the discipline. A simple but radical proposal is offered at the end for how sociologists can be put out over their misery in having to deal with the consequences of this Big Divide in their departments, in professional meetings, and most importantly, in publishing their intellectual products in journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The most recent internationally widespread disease outbreak occurred during the flu season of 2009 and 2010. On April 2009, the first cases of influenza A (H1N1) (Popularly called, Swine Flu) were confirmed in the USA and UK following a novel virus that was first identified in Mexico. As the virus spread rapidly, the risk of morbidity and mortality increased in several countries. In this paper, we rely on the social cognitive theory of risk to assess the willingness of the US public to comply with vaccination and reduce the risk of sickness and death from the flu. We conduct a secondary data analysis of the Pew Research for the People and Press October 2009 and investigate the factors associated with willingness to take the swine flu vaccine (n = 1000). The findings indicate that the decision to take the swine flu vaccination was highly polarized across partisan lines. Controlling for education, income and demographic factors, the likelihood of taking the vaccine was associated with party identification. Individuals that identified themselves as Democrats were more likely to be willing to take the swine vaccine than individuals that identify themselves as Republicans and Independents. Confidence in the ability of the government to deal with the swine flu crisis seems to explain party identification differences in the willingness to take the vaccine. The implications of the findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]