Theories of Social Differentiation
and Social Change
Social Mobility; Industrialization
and Convergence
Social Mobility refers to ‘movements’ of individuals from one
social position to another.
Pitrim Sorokin's Social Mobility (1927)
Pitrim Sorokin (1889-1960) Russian born sociologists; pioneered the
study Social Mobility (1927) & developed typological approach to
the study of culture (Social and Cultural Dynamics, four volumes,
1937-41) – which he called integralism.
“By social mobility is understood any transition of an individual or
social object or value – anything that has been created or modified
by human activity – from one social position to another.”
Sorokin introduces 3 important distinctions:
-
Vertical & horizontal mobility;
Individuals and objects;
Intergenerational and intragenerational.
- generated theoretical reflection on the causes, processes, and
consequences of social mobility;
Why bother with social mobility studies?
Ascription (social position assigned by birth, over which
individuals have no control) vs. Achievement (characteristics
acquired at some stage of the life cycle)
Theoretical Views of Mobility Mechanisms
Sorokin’s Thesis of trendless fluctuation
Industrialization and Convergence Thesis
S.M. Lipset and R. Bendix (Social Mobility in Industrial Society,
1959); Lipset and Zetterberg (1959)
Peter Blau & Otis D. Duncan „The American Occupational
Structure” (1967): Industrialization increases importance of
achievement relative to ascription processes
Featherman, Jones and Hauser (1975):
“…the genotypical pattern of mobility (circulation mobility) in industrial
societies with a market economy and a nuclear family system is basically
the same. The phenotypical pattern of mobility (observed mobility) differs
according to the rate of change in the occupational structure, exogenously
determined … by… technological change, the supply and demand for
specific kinds of labor…, and changing social values …(F, J and H, 1975, p.
340).
The CASMIN Project (Comparative Analysis of Social Mobility in
Industrial Nations)
Goldthorpe; Erikson Goldthorpe & Portocarero (1983)
Thesis: Constant flux in response to the FJH convergence thesis about
the similar mobility patterns in the industrialized countries.
Constant flux :similar mobility patterns stem form the similar
occupational and class structures that are observed in the
industrialized countries; relative mobility however can create “
distinctive national variations”, supporting Sorokin’s thesis bout the
trendless fluctuations – mobility constant flux.
Social Mobility in State Socialist CEE
Connor, Walter D. 1979. Socialism, Politics and Equality. New York:
Columbia University Press
- primary cause for these countries’ high mobility = combination of
political & economic measures that imposed a fast pace on
industrialization processes. While the communist revolution’s role in
changing the social mobility regime cannot be disregarded, this role is
circumscribed to the beginning of the structural change;
- transmission of social & cultural advantages
Domanski, H. 1996. On the Verge of Convergenc: Social Stratification in
Eastern Europe Budapest: Central European University Press
Measurement of Social Mobility
The Class Mobility Paradigm
Status Attainment
The Class Mobility Paradigm
- analyzes mobility as carried out btw. class positions;
- uses occupations as indicator of class position (occupational groups
as nominal data)
- analysis is based on matrices of occupational categories, indices of
association and log-linear models.
Goldthorpe’s class schema
- aggregates occupational groupings based on members who share
similar "market situations" and "work situations," without creating
a consistent hierarchical order.
- The differentiation of classes rests on the nature of the
employment relationship (i.e. service relationships vs. essentially
contractually regulated labor relations.
The Erikson-Goldthorpe-Portocarero Class Schema:
I.
II.
IIIa.
IIIb.
IVa.
IVb
IVc.
V.
VI.
VIIa.
VIIb.
Upper service class
Lower service class
Routine nonmanual employees, higher grade
Routine nonmanual employees, lower grade
Small proprietors with employees
Small proprietors without employees
Farmers and self-employed workers in primary production
Technicians and supervisors
Skilled manual workers
Semi- and unskilled manual workers (not in agriculture)
Semi- and unskilled manual workers in agriculture
The Status Attainment Model