A first generation critic comes of age: Reflections of a critical gerontologist

This paper reflects upon the direction and evolution of my scholarly endeavors as a sociologist of four decades in the field of aging, with thoughts on the future direction of this work and the challenges for the larger field. The perspective presented is located within two frameworks of active debate: the sociology of knowledge(s) [Gouldner, A. 1970. The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. New York: Basic Books] and public sociology, which is one of the four major types of sociology identified by Burawoy [Burawoy, M. (2005, 2007). A call for public sociology. In D. Clawson, R. Zussman, J. Misra, N. Gerstel, R. Stokes, & R. L. Anderton (Eds.), Public Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.], also including traditional professional sociology, policy sociology, and critical sociology.     

W. E. B. Du Bois at the center: from science,civil rights movement,to Black Lives Matter

I am honoured to present the 2016 British Journal of Sociology Annual Lecture at the London School of Economics. My lecture is based on ideas derived from my new book, The Scholar Denied: W.E.B. Du Bois and the Birth of Modern Sociology. In this essay I make three arguments. First, W.E.B. Du Bois and his Atlanta School of Sociology pioneered scientific sociology in the United States. Second, Du Bois pioneered a public sociology that creatively combined sociology and activism. Finally, Du Bois pioneered a politically engaged social science relevant for contemporary political struggles including the contemporary Black Lives Matter movement.     

A Troubling Presence: Indigeneity in English‐Language Canadian Sociology

Over the past decade Canadian sociology has engaged in spirited debates on the sociology of sociological research, but it has barely begun to address its relation to Indigenous theorizing, scholarship, and politics. How does the discipline deal with the settler colonial history and current realities of Indigenous social lives, and where is the place in our field for Indigenous voices and perspectives? Drawing on Coulthard's politics of recognition and Tuck's damage‐centered research, we present here the first systematic empirical analysis of the place of Indigeneity in the Canadian Review of Sociology and the Canadian Journal of Sociology. We situate the presence of Indigeneity in Canadian sociology journals in the sociopolitical context of the time, and examine how imperialism, statism, and damage are oriented within the two journals. Most importantly, we challenge the silence in the discipline's intellectual frames and research programs with respect to Indigenous theorizing about the social world.     

Method and Measurement in Sociology,fifty years on

In this article, we revisit Aaron Cicourel’s classic text Method and Measurement in Sociology. We consider the legacy and influence of the book in the context of the continued and urgent significance of such properly methodological inquiry. We examine, in particular, the ways in which Cicourel’s concern with decisions of measurement – as a situated, contingent and unavoidably practical accomplishment – makes a critical contribution to the understanding of measurement within sociology and serves as continued inspiration for the sociology of contemporary measurement practices in the context of proliferating regimes of institutional performance measurement and league tables, risk assessment and audit. We recommend a critical engagement with this text in the sociological examination of social inquiry – avoiding both overly subjective interpretations of social phenomena and the arbitrary application of crude categories to complex forms of organisation – and in sociology’s continued warrant to critically engage with the practices in and through which social reality is (re)produced.     

Mapping Gender and Migration in Sociological Scholarship: Is It Segregation or Integration?

A review of the sociological research about gender and migration shows the substantial ways in which gender fundamentally organizes the social relations and structures influencing the causes and consequences of migration. Yet, although a significant sociological research has emerged on gender and migration in the last three decades, studies are not evenly distributed across the discipline. In this article, we map the recent intellectual history of gender and migration in the field of sociology and then systematically assess the extent to which studies on engendering migration have appeared in four widely read journals of sociology (American Journal of Sociology, American Sociological Review, Demography, and Social Forces). We follow with a discussion of these studies, and in our conclusions, we consider how future gender and migration scholarship in sociology might evolve more equitably.     

Partial Paradigm Shifts in the Social Sciences: Twenty Years of Research in Rural Sociology3

Abstract Falk and Zhao (1989) have recently suggested that increased theoretical diversity characterizes the last decade of published research in Rural Sociology. We suggest that this claim is premature, given paradigmatic trends in the larger discipline of sociology. From a reanalysis of data sources and the use of an analytical framework based on the partial paradigm concept, we conclude that rural sociology is attempting to further integrate theory, methodology, and image of the subject matter within a positivistic partial paradigm framework. We further suggest that rural sociologists continue their pursuit of a reflexive understanding of the practice of social science as an integral part of their research agenda.     

Paradigms,Theories, and Methods in Contemporary Rural Sociology: A Critical Reaction to Critical Questions

Abstract The content analysis by Falk and Zhao (1989) of theoretical orientations shown in Rural Sociology articles during the span 1976–1985 is critically evaluated as to its methodological adequacy and substantive conclusions. The former is shown as suspect and, therefore, the latter become moot. Discussion is particularly focused on the elaboration by Falk and Zhao on the wisdom of the metatheoretical underpinnings of the field in the decade explored. While they are less critical in judgment of rural sociology's performance than was the earlier study being “replicated” (Picou et al. 1978a), the assertion made by Falk and Zhao is still fundamentally misdirected. Until rural sociology faces the issue of data quality, its improvements in “theory” activity will not be substantial.     

Orlando Patterson,his work,and his legacy: a special issue in celebration of the republication of Slavery and Social Death

The reissue of Orlando Patterson’s Slavery and Social Death provides an opportunity to reflect on developments in studies of slavery, postcolonial sociology, and comparative-historical sociology since the book’s initial release in 1982. In this special issue of Theory and Society, contributors from ancient history, anthropology, and sociology examine the book’s broader intellectual significance by situating it in Patterson’s corpus, covering a range of works including his fiction and scholarly publications, early work on Jamaican slave revolts, and private correspondence with key thinkers. The volume’s ambit, then, is not a single book but rather a broader field of social thought. As the articles in this issue demonstrate, the concepts and theories introduced by Patterson are still vital. In some ways, we argue, a Pattersonian sociology has only recently come to its full fruition, thanks to ongoing developments in postcolonial studies, critical race studies, anthropological and historical study of slavery, globalization studies, and feminist theory.

     

Star wars: aspects of the social construction of citations in Anglo-Canadian sociology*

Il ressort clairement de la lecture des textes en sociologie de la connaissance et de la science que les savants élaborent leurs interprcctations de la réalité en tant que membres de groupes et de réseaux sociaux. Autrement dit, les savants ne réagissent pas uniquement en fonction de la problématique à l'étude ou de normes scientifiques largement diffusées. D'où l'hypothèse selon laquelle les sociologues canadiens citeront les études de leurs collègues en fonction de l'emplacement géographique des universités de ces derniers et des contacts sociaux qui en découlent. L'auteur analyse les citations de deux livres, From Culture to Power de Brym et Fox et Sociology de Stebbins. L'analyse révèle que les auteurs de l'Ouest sont sous-représentés dans les références de From Culture to Power, qui surreprésentent ceux des grandes universités ontariennes, tandis que Sociology accorde une plus grande attention aux ouvrages d'auteurs des Prairies et de 1'Ouest. Writing in the sociologies of knowledge and science makes it clear that scientists construct their interpretations of reality as part of social groups and social networks. That is, scientists do not react solely to the research problem at hand or to widely diffused scientific norms. This view leads to the hypothesis that, in Canadian sociology, authors will cite others' studies as a function of the geographical location of their universities and resulting social contacts, emphasizing the latter. Analyses are conducted for citations in Brym and Fox's From Culture to Power and Stebbins' Sociology. Results show that references in From Culture to Power underrepresent scholars in the West and overrepresent scholars from Core universities in Ontario, while Stebbins' book gives greater attention to works from the Prairies and the West.     

Driving in a dead-end street: critical remarks on Andrew Abbott’s <Emphasis Type="Italic">Processual Sociology</Emphasis>

In his book Processual Sociology (2016), Andrew Abbott proposes a radically new theoretical perspective for sociology. This review essay discusses the strengths and weaknesses of his “processual” approach, in comparison with other dynamic perspectives in sociology such as, in particular, Norbert Elias’s “process sociology.” It critically questions central ideas and arguments advanced in this book: the reduction of social processes to “events,” the focus on stability as the central explanandum of sociological theory, the implicit separation of individual and social processes, the proposition that the social world changes faster than the individual, the idea that “excess” rather than “scarcity” is the central problematic of human affairs, the strong emphasis on the inherent normativity of sociological concepts, the focus on values as the core of human social life, the neglect of human interdependence, power, coercion, and violence, and the distinction between “moral facts” and “empirical facts.” Detailed criticisms of the arguments in various chapters are given, and alternative viewpoints are proposed. The conclusion is that Processual Sociology fails to provide a fruitful approach for understanding and explaining social processes, and that it even represents, in several respects, theoretical regression rather than progress.     

Sociological theory: Looking forward

A brief model of the rise, salience, criticism, and relative decline of theoretical perspectives in sociology is sketched, citing the dominance of sociological positivism in the early part of the twentieth century as an example. Classical evolutionary theory and structural-functionalism are also mentioned as illustrations. Viewing the contemporary theoretical scene, the author sees a kind of peaceful pluralism as a visible motif, and some modest signs of integrative or synthetic theoretical activity on the horizon. He is the author of many books and articles on sociological theory, economic sociology, collective behavior and social movements, and the sociology of education. Most recently he edited theHandbook of Sociology (1988).     

The nature of sociological knowledge

This collection of papers materialized in response to the American Sociological Association’s call for centennial plenary sessions in 2004 as it prepared for the 2005 annual meeting in Philadelphia. Three of the nearly two-dozen centennial plenary sessions selected for the conference proceedings focused on the subject of sociological knowledge. One of these plenary sessions was organized by me; the other two, originally intended to be one session but divided in order to accommodate the large number of proposed presenters, was organized by Barbara Schneider. Shortly after the sessions were confirmed, I contacted Barbara to determine her interest in publishing some of the presentations as a collection that offered multiple perspectives on the nature of sociological knowledge. Based on the initial interest expressed by both Barbara and the presenters, I contacted Larry Nichols to determine if he might have an interest in publishing a special issue of The American Sociologist on this topic. Upon his consent, work proceeded forward on this special issue. Bruce Keith is professor of sociology and associate dean for academic affairs at the United States Military Academy. He can be reached at zb9599@usma.edu.     

The study of war in American sociology: An analysis of selected journals, 1936 to 1984

In an analysis of articles in theAmerican Journal of Sociology theAmerican Sociological Review, andSocial Forces at six-year intervals between 1936 and 1984 it was found that the topic of war was not often examined, especially in more recent decades. The most unexpected finding was that there were proportionately no more articles on war in selected European journals than in the top three American journals. It was concluded that war is not perceived as an important research topic in American sociology, as reflected in major sociology journals. His dissertation will deal with conditions for cooperation between adversaries during war.     

L. L. Bernard and the original American sociologist

The original version of The American Sociologist (TAS) has been overlooked by contemporary sociologists. L. L. Bernard edited the publication from 1938 to 1947. This article describes the contents of this publication and places these materials in historical context. While there were profound differences between Bernard’s publication and the later TAS, both publications dealt with issues in the sociology of sociology. His research has ranged from criminology and the sociology of law to the sociology of science, and several previous articles of his have appeared inThe American Sociologist. specializing in sociological theory and deviance. His articles have previously appeared inThe Review of Social Theory andRural Sociology. Gideon Sjoberg gave generous encouragement and direction throughout this project. Others who offered helpful suggestions at various phases of the writing include: Jessie Bernard, Alfred McClung Lee, Irving Louis Horowitz, David Carpenter, and two anonymous reviewers.     

Women’s sociological research and writing in the AJS in the pre-World War II era

Recent revisionist scholarship on the history of sociology suggests that women scholars in the pre-World War II era made distinctive contributions to the development of the field of sociology. Most research, however, has focused on women prominent in their era, whose works might or might not be typical of all women who published during the same periods. Furthermore, few studies have made explicit comparisons between works by women and by men writing in this same era, so it has been difficult to sort out gender effects from historical era effects. This study explores writings by women and men in the first volumes of the American Journal of Sociology, from 1895 through 1940. As the oldest continuously published sociology journal in the U.S., AJS played a central role in the development of American sociology. We find that women authors were present in AJS from the earliest days, though their share of authorships never was large, and fluctuated year by year. Women’s work was distinctively different from that of men, with more women than men writing empirical, evidence-based articles, focusing on women, children, immigrants, the poor, and other have-not groups, and advocating for social reform. Writings of rank-and-file and prominent women sociologists were similar in methods, content, and form, and their distinctive contributions to sociology paralleled many of the concerns of feminist sociologists today.     

Toward a Sociology of Nature

Although we often believe that nature stands apart from social life, our experience of nature is profoundly social. This paper unpacks this paradox in order to (1) explain sociology's neglect of the environment and (2) introduce the articles in this special issue on “the sociology of nature.” I argue that sociology's disinterest in the biophysical world is a legacy of its classical concern with tracing society's “Great Transformation” from gemeinschaft to gesellschaft: while early anthropologists studied “primitive” societies that allegedly had not yet completed “the passage from nature to culture” (Lévi‐Strauss 1963 : 99), pioneering sociologists presumed that industrialization and urbanization liberated “modern” society from nature and therefore focused their attention on “urbanism as a way of life” (Wirth 1938 ). As exemplified by the articles in this symposium, environmental sociology critiques the nature‐culture and town‐country dualisms. One of environmental sociology's core contributions has been demonstrating that nature is just as much a social construction as race or gender; however, its more profound challenge to the discipline lies in its refutation of the sociological axiom that social facts can be explained purely through reference to other social facts. “Environmental facts” are a constitutive feature of social life, not merely an effect of it.     

Live tweeting and building the digital archive; #NFQLR – who and what is it for?

This paper examines the temporal and ethical affordances of commercial social media platforms, such as Twitter, as tools for engaging in social research and knowledge exchange. Drawing on activity that took place during the New Frontiers in Qualitative Longitudinal Research seminar series, the article reports on using Twitter and other social media platforms to document, share and archive ‘data’ from a series of research events. It also experiments with new modes of research writing, using fragments of ‘data’ from Twitter to distil research knowledge and ideas, whilst also capturing the pace and form of this live method of social documentation and knowledge exchange. Bringing together conversations within digital sociology about how to ‘do’ time in digital research, with methodological debates among qualitative longitudinal researchers about how to research social and biographical continuity and change, the paper argues that the presentist focus in digital research is far from inevitable. Attending to time in digital media demands that we are alert to questions of authorship, audience and co-production, recognizing the labour of research and the provenance of research knowledge, ‘data’ and ideas.     

Was there a “golden past” for the introductory sociology textbook? A citation analysis of leading journals

Much debate over the years has centered around whether there was ever a “golden past” for the introductory sociology textbook, when high quality books influenced the development of scholarship and thinking. Some empirical evidence is added to this debate through an analysis of the citations to introductory sociology textbooks in all the articles and research notes appearing in theAmerican Journal of Sociology, theAmerican Sociological Review, andSocial Forces from 1960 to 1969 and from 1984 to 1993. The data show that, although seldom cited in recent journals, introductory sociology textbooks were often cited in the earlier period. The article concludes with some thoughts about why introductory sociology textbooks have had a declining influence on scholarship.     

Legitimations of class structure inGone With The Wind

The role of popular culture in legitimating the existing social order is examined through an analysis of the film version ofGone With The Wind. This film was selected because, judging from its immense popularity, it has had great potential as a vehicle for legitimation. The analysis reveals several ways in which the audience is brought to identify with the upper class as well as several themes which legitimate class structure. An earlier version of this paper was read at the Popular Culture Association National Meeting, 1978, Cincinnati, Ohio. I wish to thank Ava Baron, Joni Fulton, Jane Rosenbaum, and the reviewers ofQualitative Sociology for their helpful comments in preparing the final draft of this paper.     

Disciplinary knowledge revisited: The social construction of sociology

In Making Science (1992) I make the distinction between two types of knowledge: research frontier knowledge and core knowledge. Core knowledge is the small body of knowledge for which the entire scientific community treats as indisputable facts. The research frontier is all new knowledge which makes claim to being facts but in practice there is no consensus on this knowledge. The two types of knowledge are linked together by the evaluation process. Most frontier knowledge turns out to be insignificant and is ignored. A small part of frontier knowledge is taken as candidates for the core and evaluated. Most of this knowledge turns out to be “wrong.” Thus the important data of Jacobs ( 1989) loses a good deal of its impact because he forces it into a theory which he calls “social control”: a theory for which there is no evidence. Stephen Cole is professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. He is the author of Making Science: Between Nature and Society and, with Jonathan R. Cole, Social Stratification in Science. Stephen Cole is professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. He is the author of Making Science: Between Nature and Society and, with Jonathan R. Cole, Social Stratification in Science.