Search

Copyright of Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology & Society is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper explores the presence and consideration of economics in sociology, specifically its classical version. It identifies certain original and independent economic theories, concepts and approaches in classical sociological theory as central and its derivations, implications and extensions of economics as peripheral. The paper argues and demonstrates that classical sociology is far from being the science of noneconomic or irrational phenomena, as often sociologists conceive it and economists perceive it in counter-distinction from economics defined as the science of rational behavior, and indeed encompasses virtually all economic activities and processes, and thus prefigures New Economic Sociology adopting the same approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social scientists, in particular sociologists, claim that the distinction between universalistic and particularistic values is relevant to explaining the social behaviour of individuals (and societies). This paper provides preliminary empirical evidence that supports the claim. It first defines a number of proxies for the degree of particularism embedded into long-celebrated dimensions of social behaviour (trust, political awareness, and associational activities). Then, it shows that the particularistic measures are positively correlated to each other and negatively correlated to some established generalist measures for all dimensions of social behaviour considered, both across and within countries and regions. Moreover, the paper relates that the various proxies for particularism share the same set of covariates (such as low education and income), which are neatly distinguishable from the determinants of the generalist measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals with the role of sociology in climate change research and policies. Climate change can be regarded as one of the greatest challenges facing the world today. It has attracted attention from several disciplines, with the physical sciences regarded as dominating climate change research. Apparently, despite that climate change is inherently a social problem, sociologists have been slow in tackling it, at both theoretical and policy levels. Even so, available literature contains assorted and interesting sociological contributions and insights. As such, this paper posits that sociologists are interested in climate change issues, have a lot to offer and they can draw from a number of sub-fields. For instance, using sociology of sustainable consumption sociologists can tackle how societies can re-organise consumption patterns and habits, sociology of education provokes more intriguing research into the construction of climate change science, knowledge and solutions and feminist sociology can extend robust research into how the material and discursive dimensions of climate change are profoundly gendered. Importantly, critical sociology provides a repertoire of concepts and novel methods that can be deployed in climate change research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I review and discuss the articles in this issue by Walker, by Wanner, and by Heidtman et al. There are three main themes that appear in all three papers: these flow from the shared commitment among these authors to understanding and promoting "scientific theory construction" within sociology, and to dispelling some common misconceptions about scientific sociological theory. The common themes that run through the three papers can be put in the form of questions: 1) What is a theory? 2) How should we evaluate theory? 3) How does theory grow? In addition to discussing these three main themes. I discuss four sub-themes that emerged: 1) Sociology as a Scientific Endeavor; 2) Critiques of General Theory as Being Positivistic; 3) Unitary versus Multiple Forms of Theory Building; 4) Professional/Disciplinary Barriers to Theory Construction and Theory Building in Sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a response to some criticisms by James Tooley of our research on parental choice The paper argues that many of Tooley's criticism are based on systematic misinterpretations and misreadings of our work, ignorance of the procedures of qualitative research and the we of untenable speculations about sampling, data collection and the interpretation of data It is suggested that Tooley's criticisms are ideologically driven and that if taken senously would make qualitative social research impossible [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the applicability of Parsonian "pattern-variables" in defining a constructed type. Specification of boundaries or cutting-off points of role relationships in Weber's three types of authority systems, while an intriguing problem, is a project too great in scope for a short paper. Instead, for this preliminary attempt, a social system has been selected in which a few crucial role relationships define its character. It is also a system familiar to sociologists. The setting selected is the educational institution at the university level. The type to be defined, "the seat of learning," is perhaps the most "ideal" of ideal types. A number of other constructed type educational institutions might be isolated, e.g., "marriage markets," "sources of status," "diploma mills," or, perhaps, "campus playgrounds." Sets of role relationships could be specified to define any of these types. For purposes of illustration, however, the definition of one type will be sufficient. Four steps are involved in defining the constructed type: (1) selection of the crucial role pairs; (2) the definition of the chosen role relationships by use of the pattern-variables; (3) measurement of the pattern- variable choices; and (4) establishment of boundary points for the pattern-variables themselves. The fourth step will not be completed in this paper; it is felt that the necessary methodological apparatuses are already available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Editorial. French sociologist and internationally renowned public intellectual Pierre Bourdieu died in 2002. He developed a remarkable capacity for critical social analysis and epistemic reflexivity. He also organized a network of progressive social scientists into the group "Raisons d'agir" and launched a publishing house of the same name to bring sociological analyses of contemporary civic issues to a broader public. Bourdieu also succeeded in developing a highly individual brand of sociology. His scholarship was a synthesis of philosophy, social anthropology and sociology underpinned by a passionate commitment to social justice. An acute interest in social inequality and the ways in which it is masked and perpetuated became an enduring contribution preoccupation that influenced his writings.

In this paper Gewirtz and Cribb offer a response to Hammersley and Abraham's criticisms of their arguments about the place of values in social research published in this issue of BJSE. In doing so, they make clear that most of the positions that Hammersley and Abraham attribute to them are ones that they do not identify with and that, like Hammersley and Abraham, they would reject. In order to further clarify and specify their own position, Gewirtz and Cribb argue that: their advocacy of ethical reflexivity rests on the assumption that there are many incompatible sets of values in play within even a single vantage point; researchers should sometimes take an interest in knowledge use although they should not always be required to do so; and, whilst at the level of propositions it is always possible to abstract out and distinguish between factual claims and value claims, at the level of practice there can be significant resonances and linkages between the two, so it is important to be ethically reflexive about these entanglements. Finally, the authors agree that values should not be seen purely as a source of contamination but that attention to values can help to underpin 'objectivity'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is intended to place the other papers in this issue of the journal in a broader theoretical and political context. It considers some of the ways in which sociologists of education have approached the analysis of the curriculum and discusses the extent to which their work can be seen as a contribution to political struggles in and around the curriculum. It pays particular attention to the ways in which recent American and Australian work in this field has developed and to some of the criticisms that have been made of the political orientation of such work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper argues that in recent years sociologists have neglected the processes of occupational socialisation of teaching, despite research interest in everyday life in other educational settings Shortcomings in the extant research on teacher socialisation and in the wider literature on professional socialisation are detailed to explain the lack of intellectual interest in teacher socialisation Finally, the paper offers some potential lines for the development of research on teacher socialisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses data from the Scottish School Leavers Surveys to investigate trends in the transition from school at a time of deepening recession. The main change observed is the collapse of employment between 1979 and 1983. The paper also describes trends in the distribution of school-leaver employment, in its industrial and occupational composition, in patters of movement in the youth labour market and in the role of special programmes. Some of its general conclusions challenge ideas current among some British sociologists. First, youth unemployment (at least among recent school leavers) is no longer significantly connected with patterns of subemployment or frequent job-changing. Secondly, unemployment has not fundamentally changed the 'selective function' of education; credentials have retained their labour-market value in relative if not in absolute terms. Thirdly, the recent rise in school-leaver unemployment is very largely a result of the recession-the decline in the aggregate demand for labour-rather than of underlying structural changes that disadvantage young people; most recent changes in the transition from school to work are in principle reversible if the recession ends. The paper assesses the implications of these findings for the sociology of education, and concludes with a discussion of the possible impact of the Youth Training Scheme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is an increasing necessity for sociologists to improve their skills in writing sociological research papers. The connection between writing and thinking is close and crucial. Thinking requires symbols, because they are not a sufficient cause of thought but a necessary condition. Therefore, the written version can be brought closer to what one really thinks. Furthermore, writing has a palpability that the ephemeral, spoken word lacks. The concern for effective writing is not a trivial form over content. Good writing is a condition, slowly achieved, of saying what one means to say, of being what one means to be. It is a condition of achieving an adequate professional identity for the community of sociologists.

This paper explores the importance of race and racial attitudes among sociologists by attempting to document the existence of what has been called a "black insiders doctrine" and showing that black sociologists are more likely than their white counterparts to subscribe to this doctrine. Data in this paper are based on a survey questionnaire administered during the winter of 1978. The findings show that: (1) race is a strong predictor in determining how sociologists perceive the role and characteristics of black sociologists and (2) black sociologists do not think highly of whites who study race relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the relevance of both formal training and current career conditions for the professional activity of an academic. We focus on the socialization of a sample of Ph.D. sociologists submitting papers for publication. Using regression procedures, we relate productivity of the training faculty, current publication pressures, sex, and year of degree to publication-related activity. We find that current publication pressures is a better predictor of professional activity than it productivity of the training faculty. In addition, sex appears to mediate professional socialization experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a discussion on values in family research. Professor Donald O. Cowgill has attempted to explore the influence of an individual's values upon the selection of a research problem, his research design, the presentation of data and his findings or conclusions. He has done this by a rather extensive examination of literature dealing with migration ranging from the sociologist to the novelist. By and large he exonerates the sociologist, particularly the contemporary sociologist, from this type of bias, although this may actually be an example of the influence of an individual's values or value judgments. it is really impossible to do justice to Cowgill's paper both because of its length and its exhaustive citation of sources. The author believes that two points are pertinent. First, is it ever possible to reduce the question of migration to such simple terms as "Is migration good or bad ?" The second point is the influence of social change on attitudes toward migration. The author holds that research does depend upon the personal predilections of the researcher, but increasingly larger projects seem to depend as much, if indeed not considerably more, upon the value judgments of large foundations which furnish research money.

This article discusses changing patterns of rural organization. There are many different approaches possible for a summary of a congress. The first design which will be used is to study a general hypothesis based on the sociologist R.K. Merton's comparison between European and American research technique in the sociology of knowledge. It seems as if one of the most important tasks in science is to study repeatedly the reliability and the validity of the empirical findings, in order to construct a coherent theoretical building. This means that the same hypothesis has to be tested several times at different places and at different points of time. It might be a very stimulating task for the European Society for Rural Sociology to further such a cumulative work. There has not either been very much discussion of how to study the consequences of a change. Especially the nonintended consequences are of great interest for a rural sociologist and have great practical importance. A final aspect in connection with change is the study of social processes. The necessity of analyzing the socio-cultural linkage has already been emphasized.

The article presents information about the June 1970 issue of the journal "Sociological Focus." The summer issue of Sociological Focus traditionally features the winner of the Student Paper Competition. The journal publishes the top graduate and undergraduate papers, by sociologist Michael R. McKee and Gary Allan Gereffi. All award winners are listed elsewhere in this issue. Norman F. Washburne is Guest Editor of the Spring, 1971 issue, which will deal with the topic of attitudes. In addition to the student papers, the journal has published in this issue sociologist Dwight Dean's presidential address and contributed papers.

Copyright of Culture, Health & Sexuality is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The work of Ulrich Beck, particularly his concept of the 'individualised individual', is increasingly cited by educational social scientists. As yet, there have been few empirical investigations that consider how applicable and relevant is the notion of the 'individualised individual' in understanding how people make sense of their lives (for an exception, see Reay, 2003 ). This paper considers Beck's assertion that social class is of increasingly less importance as society shifts from a first to a second modernity. Interviews were carried out into the career experiences of a group of academic women working in higher education institutions. The conclusions reached suggest that if Beck's theory is to be useful in understanding contemporary actors in contemporary societies then the critical concepts he introduces need to be articulated by researchers in more complex ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper takes as its focus the concept of 'field', which has received relatively less attention than Bourdieu's other concepts such as 'cultural capital' and 'habitus' in the sociology of education. The development of the concept is outlined to present Bourdieu's understanding of higher education as a field consisting of cognitive and structural mechanisms that mediate sociopolitical and economic forces while simultaneously reproducing fundamental principles of social stratification. As an illustration of its widespread application, Bourdieu's framework is applied to develop an analytical understanding of institutional strategies developed by South African universities during a period of political instability. Drawing insights from the South African case study and Bourdieu's empirical research, the article concludes that Bourdieu's theory may be seen to have transcended more simplistic conceptions of universities as closed systems detached from the sociopolitical complex or as mere reflections of external power relations. However, the strict relational nature of Bourdieu's framework and his concept of the 'arbitrary' have placed limits on the extent to which his theory can offer a more in-depth account of the relationship between higher education and society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South African sociologists of education are living through a momentous and highly particular transition at the same time as they participate in global trends and debates This paper reviews changes in their framing concerns as they move from an oppositional positionality to a far more ambiguous space that seems to require of them to choose between critique and reconstruction The resultant re-positioning and the changes forms of appropriation of international themes as local priorities shift is the central concerns of this review [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to encourage sociologists of the curriculum to contribute more both to curriculum policy advocacy and the curriculum development process. It concludes by suggesting four areas of curriculum policy research around which both sociologists of education and curriculum studies 'specialists' could unite and which would go some way towards meeting the demands of the National Curriculum at the level of policy analysis and implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Educational selection has been a central issue for Structural Functionalist, Marxist and Interpretative sociologists of education While knowledge about selection processes within schools has increased over the past two decades, as a result of ethnographic studies of schooling, the social process of collective teacher decision making, when teachers are engaged in institutional channelling, has been largely neglected This paper explores collective teacher decision making at a point of allocation through the medium of a case study of setting in one 9-13 years middle school The paper argues that the discussion concerning the recent initiatives of educational selection embodied in modularisation, pupil assessment, common examinations and national testing should be informed by research of teacher interaction at points of allocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I shall deal with some issues raised by a sociologist interested in music education, Graham Vulliamy I shall draw on four of his papers. There will be certain areas of agreement between us recognition of the importance of Afro-American music in our century and its dominance in the popular tradition, that forms of analysis through notation are particularly inappropriate to an oral-aural tradition, that all music is bounded by particular styles and traditions and occurs within a socio-cultural context. I shall briefly examine two minor points of difficulty--that Vulliamy, overstates the 'freedom' of improvised music and the rigidity of notated music and that he confuses discussion by conflating the views of Meyer and Langer. There are three major issues to which we need to address ourselves The first of these is the assumption that pop music can be legitimised in school merely by establishing that different criteria are necessary The second arises in the attempt to provide appropriate tools of analysis by arguing, with Shepherd, that music has a kind of social referent This proposition is stated in several ways In some forms the proposition is acceptable but in others it is problematic. The third issue involves problems concerning the expressive and formal elements of music and the uses to which music is put, which ma, range from a signal for action (or reaction) to a meaningful symbol (a much more complex and rich form of response) Using the terms 'intensional' and 'engendered feeling' as though they were synonymous and the terms 'extensional' and 'embodied meaning' as though they were the same, some confusion is created, yet there are implications for music education which are not only theoretically important but vital in practical terms of teaching and learning in schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper outlines the career of Maurice F. Parmelee, sociologist, government official, nudist, and author of thirteen books, including the first American criminology text (1918). The contents of the latter are examined and contrasts with contemporary textbooks are noted. Parmelee's career is an anomoly, for although he published abundantly, he faded into sociological obscurity. Some conjecture is offered about scholarly career paths generally, drawn out of the Parmelee case. Finally, the paper argues that historical accounts of the development of American criminology are incomplete, for they fail to mention a number of early figures, including Parmelee. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the recent job crunch in sociology From a historical perspective the current glut of Ph.D's is seen not as a temporary aberration in an otherwise healthy economic system, but rather as a recurring phenomenon with the conditions that foster the oversupply of Ph.D's likely to continue well into the future We show how most proposed solutions to the unemployment and underemployment problems faced by sociologists are limited by the failure to examine the Historical origins and structural characteristics that have given rise to current imbalances. Prevailing conditions and opportunity structures are accepted as given. This uncritical and atheoretical approach limits our understanding of current employment problems and restricts the range of potential solutions that are considered. The paper lays out an alternative framework for analyzing the sociology job market and suggests new directions for research into this social problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the sociological aspects of profession. A little over ten years ago, in September 1964, sociologist Harold Wilensky published a "The Professionalization of Everyone?" Reacting in part to sociologist Nelson Foote's revival of old claims that labor was being professionalized and to the growing barrage of papers and books seeking to show that all occupations, and indeed the whole society, were on the professionalization kick, Wilensky tried to sound a note of warning. This caveat was based on both historical and definitional considerations. Professions, he noted, differed from other occupations in being based on esoteric knowledge acquired only through long training, and in having incumbents who adhere to the professional norm of a service ideal. The established professions, moreover, have gone through a process of professionalization involving, among other things, locating training within universities, forming professional associations, licensing, and the adoption of ethical codes. These characteristics and processes have combined to provide professions extraordinary autonomy-the authority and freedom to regulate themselves and act within their spheres of competence.

in this area. A radical re-tooling of some of his earlier definitions and concepts seems to be needed, if these are to become more appreciated and useful in future research. In short, while he undoubtedly knew his empirical evidence very well, Weber, like many other scientists, experienced some painful difficulties in attempting to classify and label it. The major modification tentatively suggested in this paper is that it is necessary to pay close attention to an extremely sharp contrast between the two variants of the traditionalist concept of domination, patrimonialism vs. feudalism. This basic contrast, crucial in his scientific investigation of cultural differentiations, runs most consistently through an unbelievable wealth of research material accumulated by him. It is an empirical typology of two sets of contradictory historical experiences concerning the origin and development of domination and legitimacy. There is another rather significant and frequently overlooked scientific contribution of Max Weber within the context of this paper. Albert Salomon's witty comment from the 1930's on the Me-long dialogue of Max Weber with the ghost of Karl Marx is now very popular among many radical, establishment, and the-rest-of-us sociologists. In spite of being fashionable to refer to it through the 1960's, no serious attempts were made to account for this many-faceted dialogue. This paper will try to settle one of the very much alive aspects of the same dialogue— hopefully to the lasting satisfaction of all. One morning numerous and valuable conceptual tools suggested by Max Weber, a typological dichotomy of patrimonialism vs. feudalism, has not been sufficiently utilized in modem research and obviously for good reasons. But the theoretical potentialities of this dichotomy seem to be imperative and still go begging particularly in an ever-increasing number of fascinating comparative analyses of durable and large political systems in time as well as in space. A consensus seems to be growing that the former is indispensable for the understanding of the latter, because the durability of patterning, found only in the comparison of things in time, is one of the most crucial prerequisites for contemporary studies of comparing things in space. Wesson (1967) and Eisenstadt (1963) in their admirable generalizing sweep of great historical empires, Blum (1964) and Jacobs (1958) in their specialized areas, could have immensely facilitated their formidable tasks if Weber's dichotomy had been available to them, thus only increasing the welldeserved impact of their contributions. Indeed, this dichotomy of Weber's, similarly to some others, does need just about a total rescue if not resurrection, and no student should be blamed for not digging for it for his own needs. Patrimonial-feudal dichotomy is buried in Webers extremely rough-draft writings on the traditionalist type of domination. In addition to being by necessity a residual type—whatever did not qualify for charismatic or legal-rational types was hastily located here perhaps for the time being—the traditionalist type, as presented by Weber, is one of the most mettled and confusing segments of Ms writings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The problem of the kind of social organization necessary to bring about radical social change was raised by Marx in 1843-1844 in his essay on Hegel's philosophy of law. In this essay Marx specified the kind of social organization capable of bringing about the total, socialist revolution as the proletariat, a class, in society but not of it, conscious of itself and of its enemies, and organized as a party. (See also Marx and Engels, 1848). In the historical development of Marxism, Marx' answer was reinforced, but also narrowed and specified, by Lenin's classical (1902) formulation of the revolutionary cadre party. In a world in which many now talk of revolution, both in the "Third World," and even in modem industrialized countries, it may be of some use to re-examine the question of the kind of social organization involved in generating radical social change, and to reexamine the Marxist answer. My strategy in this paper is to attack the problem indirectly, by reexamining Max Weber's discussion of the role of certain kinds of Protestant groups in the rise of the capitalist world. I shall try to justify this indirect strategy at the paper's conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When sociologists discuss the analytical concept "integration" they use an implicit conceptual imagery which must be made clear if some of the most common confusions and misunderstandings in this area are to be avoided. The recent discussion of the concept has been vigorous, but a systematic appraisal of the issue is needed. It is attempted in this paper. Our analysis must have two parts: first, we must understand the formal meaning of the concept "integration" as such—its logical properties, as it were, which stem from its nature as a characterization of whole-part relationships; second, we must apply the formal insights gained to a brief review of the analytical uses of the concept in sociological theory; it may then be possible to specify at least some of the conceptual relationships between different types of "integration theories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the history of science it has often happened that a scholar's ideas are denied full recognition because of that scholar's real or assumed connection to some controversial ideology. The position accorded to Vilfredo Pareto is one illustration of such practice in present-day sociology. This scholar is often said to have been a "Newton of the Moral World," or altogether a fascist ideologist. So Faris informs us that "The book [The Mind and Society] formulates the implicit philosophy of Italian Fascism, advocating the right of the strong to take what they want without apology or appeal to moral principles." In tracing the development of social thought, Bogardus devotes an entire chapter to "Pareto and Fascist Thought," and authoritatively argues that "While fascism has some of its roots in Nietzsche's concepts and other roots in Machiavellianism, yet Pareto's ideas come even closer to giving an adequate basis." Zanden, in turn, interprets Pareto's sociology to be "a philosophy of society, a social creed, determined mainly by violent and ever purely personal passions. The logical fulfillment of this political manifesto is fascism." We need not continue further; analogous affirmations are bountiful in the literature. To be sure, not all sociologists accept this view, but to date little or no systematic effort has been made to resolve the controversy, with the result that many students of sociology are unwitting victims of one of the most cruel intellectual hoaxes perpetrated against their discipline and one of their kind. The present paper proposes to offer a clarification with respect to the alleged connection between Pareto's sociology and fascist ideology. Our approach takes us in two major directions: first, an examination of Pareto's Treatise, his chief sociological work, and second, an examination of a series of letters written to his great friend Pantaleoni during the period when fascism was a political reality in Italy. Before proceeding to present our argument, it may be useful to inquire briefly about the meaning of "fascism," as his critics tend to use that word. A rapid glance at the literature reveals that the following are generally believed to be among the chief characteristics of fascist ideology: distrust of reason, a code of behavior based on "race" and violence, belligerent nationalism, government by an elite, and totalitarianism. Characteristically, these then provide the basis for accusing Pareto of "antirationalism," "anti-intellectualism," "contempt for democracy," and approval of the use of force at all costs. The major portion of this paper will be concerned, therefore, with explicating Pareto's position on these four issues. We shall begin by considering Pareto's alleged antirationalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article comments on various research work done by sociologist Johan Galtung. It is noteworthy, that Galtung's major contributions to sociology are to the theory and method of the field. Some of his important published contributions are: "Rank and Social Integration," "Social Theories in Progress," and "A Structural Theory of Aggression." Galtung has also done a lot of peace research work. His contributions to peace and conflict research during the past decade fall in these broad areas: large scale attitude research; spot studies; Norway's outside relations; the social structure and development of foreign areas; science policy for peace research. Galtung's study of attitudes includes attitudes toward disarmament, arms control, atoms for peace, visits by heads of superpowers, artificial satellites, etc. Galtung's contributions to the knowledge of foreign social structures come from papers containing a detailed study of three villages in Sicily, Italy, and an essay with a broad view of intercommunications in Latin America. He has also tried his methodological skills in refining the measurement of social economic development.

This paper reports on a project following up previous work about patterns of and attitudes to assessment among sociologists. Two forms of data collection were undertaken: an online questionnaire to sociology departments and a series of focus groups with undergraduate students. The results showed that assessment has become a more salient issue than ten years ago, but that most of the innovations in practice had taken place in post-1992 institutions. The focus group findings confirm those from national satisfaction surveys; namely that student dissatisfaction with assessment is profound and that it persists throughout their undergraduate experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Clinical reasoning plays a major role in the ability of doctors to make diagnoses and decisions. It is considered as the physician's most critical competence, and has been widely studied by physicians, educationalists, psychologists and sociologists. Since the 1970s, many theories about clinical reasoning in medicine have been put forward. Purpose: This paper aims at exploring a comprehensive approach: the ''dual-process theory'', a model developed by cognitive psychologists over the last few years. Discussion: After 40 years of sometimes contradictory studies on clinical reasoning, the dual-process theory gives us many answers on how doctors think while making diagnoses and decisions. It highlights the importance of physicians' intuition and the high level of interaction between analytical and non-analytical processes. However, it has not received much attention in the medical education literature. The implications of dual-process models of reasoning in terms of medical education will be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper considers Bourdieu's concepts of perspectivism and reflexivity, looking particularly at how he develops arguments about these in his recent work, The Weight of the World (1999) and Pascalian Meditations (2000b). We explicate Bourdieu's distinctive purposes and deployment of these terms and approaches, and discuss how this compares with related methodological and theoretical approaches currently found in social and feminist theory. We begin by considering three main ways in which 'reflexivity' is deployed in current sociological writing, distinguishing between reflexive sociology and a sociology of reflexivity. This is followed by a discussion of the main aspects of Bourdieu's approach to 'reflexive sociology' and its relation to his concepts of social field, perspectivism and spaces of point of view. He argues that we need to interrogate the idea of a single 'perspective' and account especially for the particularity and influence of the 'scholastic' point of view. He characterizes this latter point of view as unaware of its own historicity and as largely concerned with contemplation and with treating ideas primarily as abstractions ( Bourdieu, 2000b ). Bourdieu's intervention is to argue, as he has throughout his work, for a more reflexive account of one's location and habitus, and for sustained engagement with ideas and social issues as practical problems. Bourdieu exhorts researchers to work with 'multiple perspectives' ( Bourdieu et al. , 1999 , p. 3), the various competing 'spaces of points of view', without collapsing into subjectivism or relativism. We then consider recent feminist engagements with and critiques of Bourdieu's notion of reflexivity and chart some of the main points of contention regarding its relevance and conceptual potential for theorizing gender identities and transformations in current times. We conclude with a brief outline of how we are working with a reflexive sociological approach in a cross-generational study of young women in difficult circumstances, 'on the margins' of education and work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper attempts to explicate and locate the concept of 'cultural capital' in terms of Pierre Bourdieu's more general theory of the forms of capital and their transubstantiations. It examines the manner in which the relationship between the economic field, and its relations of inequality and power, and the cultural field involves a process of systematic misrecognition on the basis of which the positions and relations of the cultural field come to be recognized as 'arbitrary'. In these terms, pedagogic action is defined as 'symbolic violence'. It is suggested that the relationship between 'objective probability structures' and cultural fields can be usefully approached through the 'dual aspect' theory of the philosopher, Benedict Spinoza. Finally, a tension is noted between the manner in which educational differences between classes are explained and the manner in which differences within classes are explained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This issue Sociological Focus presents a series of paper that examine the seismic transformation in the nature of work and the structure of work organizations that have occurred over the past three decades. Since the 1970s, organizations have restructured work in response to changes in capital, product , and consumer markets, while being restructured by the evolution of new forms of work and the changing demographics of who does work. These transformation and the forces behind them have been characterized in various ways by sociologists and economists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The sociology departments in the Nordic countries provide the institutional platform for Nordic Sociology and for the Nordic national sociological associations that form the Scandinavian Sociological Association. This paper focuses on journal articles produced by current (as of 1 January 2001) faculty of 16 of these Nordic Sociology departments in the period 1981-2000. First, we provide a brief overview of article productivity and citations to articles produced in this period by country and department. Second, we estimate a multilevel model of citation patterns by articles published, the academic position and productivity of each author, and the structure and productivity of each department as a whole. Third, we test the extent to which the effects of such factors differ between departments and individuals. In all departments, publications in high-impact journals increase the number of citations to any given article, to other work of the same author, and to the work of other faculty in the department. The effect of publishing in high-impact journals differs significantly between individual authors, and work in certain types of journals yields more citations than the journal impact factor would predict. We argue that departmental affiliations with outside faculty and departmental productivity can be seen as a form of social capital that benefits both individuals and departments as a whole. These findings strongly suggest that diversity is a defining characteristic of this sociological community, precluding monolithic definitions of Nordic sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses the methods of personal reflection and auto/biography to consider the ways in which global social and political transformations have influenced a key generation of feminist sociologists entering the academy and attempting to introduce feminist knowledge and pedagogy into academic curricula. Three critical events on or around 22 November are used to highlight key political moments, the associated development of changing themes in forms of analysis of social transformations, and the part played by feminism and sociology within higher education. They are the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1963, the Israeli–Arab war in 1973 and the resignation of Margaret Thatcher in 1990. The argument is that there has been a clear relation between changing social and political contexts and methodological understandings, which have drawn on developing feminist perspectives and reflexive sociological analysis, especially as embraced within the sociology of education. In particular, the shift from a political and professional perspective on social change and family life towards one that engages with personal issues is noteworthy. It is one of the hallmarks of both feminist notions associated with reflexivity and developing sociological methodologies and policy sociology. Thus, the personal and the political are now central methodological forms of feminist and sociological analysis within education and, especially, the sociology of education, influencing pedagogy within higher education, especially associated with developments in professional postgraduate education. I weave my personal reflections on my professional developments through an analysis of the key moments related to specific policy regimes and changing forms of understandings within the fields of policy sociology and sociology of education. I conclude with current concerns about the balances between the personal and professional within educational research and policy sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is based on the idea that the problem of unity or integration of modern society has not yet been solved in sociological theory. The paper attempts a new solution based on a creative synthesis of elements from Talcott Parsons' functionalism, rational choice theory, and Niklas Luhmann's new systems theory. The core idea is that the state and the political sphere work together as an integrating centre of modern societies. Present approaches understand the political allocation of resources either as an exchange process or as solidarity caused by internalized social norms. None of them embodies a concept of collective rationality; therefore they cannot give a dynamic account of the public allocation of collective goods. This dichotomy of individual rationality and norm-guided behaviour will be produced and reproduced on the level of general theory in the discussion on the problem of order or collective action as long as sociology is founded on the assumption that society is made up of individual human beings and their actions. However, by replacing action with Luhmann's concept of communication and rethinking collective action within this new framework, it becomes possible to develop a concept of collective rationality. This new conceptualization is used to clear up problems and overcome shortcomings in Luhmann's own theory of modern society as functionally differentiated. Observed as a consequence of action, function is collective action. A solution to the problem of collective action or social order is found with the emergence of rational solidarity as a medium that symbolizes the difference between individual and collective rationality as a unity: one should sacrifice individual opportunities to achieve collective goals and solve problems for the society to which one belongs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marxist sociology of education has been criticized in recent papers by Hickox and Hargreaves. It is argued that these writers largely misunderstand and misrepresent the work they criticize Hickox attributes a position to Marxist sociologists of education which few, if any, now hold Hargreaves makes a more powerful case, but is insufficiently familiar with Marxist scholarship to grasp the nature of the Marxist project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociology has fractured into a number of schools, each claiming to be distinct from the others and to have its own theory. The trouble with the theories is that most of them fail to make their general propositions explicit. Were they made explicit, all the theories would turn out to contain at least the general propositions of behavioral psychology, and the intellectual unification of sociology could begin. The paper discusses the reasons why many sociologists are reluctant to accept this argument. It also discusses other claimants to the status of theory, including "pattern" theories, functional theories (one of which is really behavioral), and the difficulties created by some uses of the concept, social structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rationality that guides the sociological community has generated principles to evaluate members' work. Under the sway of these principles, Georg Simmel surfaces either as a peripheral member of the community or as an outright failure. His critics have argued that his work is "fragmented," that he begins without having formulated "guiding statements," that he is "unsystematic" and "undisciplined." Yet we can discover in Simmel's writings a distinct rationality that upsets this criticism by its transcendence of it. Had these particular critics read his work more carefully they might have discovered that Simmel had anticipated their criticism and had carefully reevaluated its source of authority. In this paper 1 address the problems of discipline and systematic unity in sociological writing in order to unmask the rationality held within the sociological community and to formulate Simmel's unique contribution as a member of that community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

American society has moved away from the two societies, black and white, separate and unequal that highlighted the 1967 Presidential Commission Report -- evolving instead into a profusion of worlds reflecting various combinations of races, ethnicities and classes. This paper analyzes two groups -- the black middle class and the white underclass -- that emerged and grew after the report and defy much of the theorizing sociologists have produced on race and class. It argues that the black middle class and the white underclass reflect "interlocking categories of experience" that are unfamiliar. It encourages a new understanding that captures the reality of these race/class groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urban sociologists assert that community sentiments and community evaluations are important reflections of a society's social order. This paper examines the impact of personal and social attributes of urban dwellers, their perceptions of neighborhood characteristics, and their neighborhood-based social networks, as well as objective characteristics of their neighborhoods, on these two dimensions of people's local community. Using regression analysis on data collected in Indianapolis and Pittsburgh, I find that locally-based social networks and perceptions of the neighborhood help explain community sentiments, whereas objective community characteristics and neighborhood perceptions are useful for explaining community evaluation. Differences between the Indianapolis and Pittsburgh analyses are used to suggest possible lines of future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The goal of this paper is to show the relevance of applied sociology for problems related to the identification, reporting, substantiation, and treatment of mistreatment in the family. Definitional conflicts circumvent professional, agency, and community attempts to deal with abuse and neglect of children, elderly parents, wives and husbands. The role of the applied sociologist is discussed in terms of (1) Recognizing definitional problems; (2) Researching the specific nature of these problems as a basis for change; (3) Suggesting alternatives for policy and program planning and implementing procedures to help solve these problems. Studies of family mistreatment are discussed to illustrate designs and methods employed to research these problems. Then various applied sociological roles are presented which can be employed to solve client's problems in terms of conflicts between professional and lay persons' definitions of maltreatment, underreporting/overreporting including reporting bias, unwarranted attrition of cases, problems of interprofessional and interorganizational coordination, agency-public conflict over agency procedures and decisions as a result of controversial cases. The unique contribution of the applied sociologist is the application of the sociological perspective to these problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the criteria, said to determine sociologists' salary increases, promotions, or tenure appointments and the factors which influence these criteria. Of specific interest is the weight given to research and publications and the internal and external departmental variables affecting the evaluation standards utilized. Minimum degree requirement, degree of faculty control over departmental policies, and highest degree offered emerged to explain rewards given for publishing and researching. An unexpected finding was the agreement across institutions in the relative importance of research and publication. The argument is made that the increased bureaucratization of academia, with its latent consequences, such as the need to achieve control and efficiency, helps to explain this agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article challenges the folk-urban evolutionary tradition that is exemplified by sociologist Ferdinand Toennies' Gemeinachaft und Gesellachaft and supported by sociologist Emile Durkheim's concepts of mechanical and organic solidarity. The author argues that the relationship between these dichotomous concepts is essentially dialectical. Hence, in modern industrial systems, Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft ultimately transform into a qualitatively different system. The dialectic of pronouns described in this paper shows the fallacy of much historical sociology by directly challenging several postulates elaborated by both Toennies and Durkheim. Both authors erred by pronouncing the antithesis dominance of the "I" as the ultimate historical outcome of industrial development. Instead, the modem evolutionary stage combines two opposites: "I" and "we" under the dominance of the "they." Hence, although the Toennies-Durkheim paradigm may still be of historical interest, their theoretical assessment of social evolution is largely inaccurate. Gesellschaft exists only in social theory; in reality, it is dead. Durkheim also erred in predicting that artificial communicty achieved via occupational-associational groups would eventually cure the individual pathologies induced during the dominance of the "I."

The article presents response to Arnold M. Levin, a famous sociologist regarding his view on social sciences by Barbara K. Shore, a social thinker. Shore states that she found Levin's paper interesting and thoughtful. Her disagreements are in the areas covered in her opinion piece. She focused on the issue of freestanding programs, which are non-university based and not based in a social work program. She understood that this was the issue to be addressed. The idea of having a clinical track in doctoral programs in schools of social work has some interesting issues connected to it, in terms of how this is done, what is the relation- ship of the clinical emphasis to the other aspects of doctoral education, specifically the research emphasis and the connection to policy issues and the social context within which practice should be carried out. Apart from some diversity she concurs with Levin that they must think seriously this issue and she endorsed his notion of some study process to examine this issue and to see what options are possible that respect the integrity of clinical social work, as part of the social work profession and that also preserve the integrity of doctoral education.