Table 5-1. Kerbo’s Chapter 5 Outline: Modern (U.S.)
Stratification Theories
•
Early Stratification Studies:
– Conflict: Veblen’s Leisure Class, Lynd’s Middletown
– Order: Warner’s Yankee City
•
Functional Model
– Davis and Moore; Parsons
– Critics
– Occupational Prestige and SES
•
Conflict Model
– Hunter
– Mills
•
Debates
– Basis of inequality
– Theories of class
Figure 5-1. Davis and Moore’s Functional Model of
Inequality
-
Distribution
Of Rewards
+
Recruitment of
Best and Brightest
Change in
Supply and
Demand
Table 5-2. Model Assumptions for Davis and Moore’s
Functional Model of Social Stratification
1. Differential Functional Importance of Positions (Occupations)
2. Limited Supply of Qualified Persons
3. Differential Cost of Training Persons for Different Positions
4. Need to Induce Qualified to Bear Costs of Training
5. Inducements Include Subsistence/Luxury, Fun, Fame
6. Distribution of these Goodies as Inducements is Basis for Stratification
7. Thus Inequality is Inevitable and Functional (Necessary and Desirable)
Table 5-3. Parsons’ Functional Model Assumptions
•
Placement is Based on Moral Evaluation by Others
•
Moral Evaluation is Based on Shared Value System (Consensus)
•
Value System is Based in Dominant Institution (in Particular Time and Place)
•
Exemplary (in these terms) are Awarded High Status, Income, Wealth
Figure 5-2. Dahrendorf’s Model of Class Conflict
Authority
Conflict
Subordinate
Figure 5-3. C. Wright Mills Model of the Power Elite
Government Leaders
Cultural Leaders
Economic Leaders
Figure 5-4. Conflict Functional Model of Inequality
-
Distribution
Of Rewards
+
Status Quo
Mass Political
Movements
Figure 5-5. Dahrendorf’s Model of Class Conflict and Social
Change
Collapse
Established
Authority
Social
Movement
Charismatic
Leader
Routinization
New
Authority
Figure 5-6. Blau and Duncan’s Model of SocioEconomic Status
Average
Education
For Occupation
Average Income
For Occupation
Popular
Perception of
Occupation’s
Prestige
Prestige = constant + B1 (Education) + B 2 (Income) +/- measurement error
Table 5-4. Class, Status and Power Dimensions Stressed in
Stratification Paradigms (from Kerbo, p. 131)
Value Assumptions
Critical
Uncritical
Does Not Exist
Functional Theory
Status Honor
Ruling Class
Theory
Class
Power-Conflict
Theory
Power
Order
Model
Assumptions
Conflict
Table 5-5. The Convergence of Occupational, Bureaucratic,
and Property Divisions on Class Categories
Positions in three main types of institutional structures
Occupation
Bureaucratic
Authority
Property
Relation
Upper Class
High
High
Owner
Corporate Class
High
High
Non-Owner
Middle Class
High to Mid
Mid
Non-Owner
Working Class
Mid to Low
Low
Non-Owner
Low
Low
Non-Owner
Class categories
Lower Class
Table 5-6. Wright’s Class Categories, Defined by Ownership,
Employees, Skill, and Persons Supervised
Relations of Production
Class
Owns
M.O.P.
Employs
Workers
Skill
Level
Supervises
Others
Capitalist
Yes
Many
Variable
Usually
PettyBourgeois
Yes
Few
Variable
Few
Professional
No
No
Expert
No
Manager
No
No
Expert
Yes
Supervisor
No
No
Low
Yes
Skilled
Worker
No
No
Medium
No
Worker
No
No
Low
No
Figure 5-7. Wright’s Model of Class Relations
Artisanal
Petty Bourgeois
Professional
Worker
Capitalist
State Socialist
Employer
Manager
Skilled Worker
Worker
Source: Erik Olin Wright, “Varieties of Marxist Conceptions,” in Social
Stratification, Edited by David B. Grusky (Westview, 2001), p. 124