What is the Main Significance of Economic for Sociological Theory?

This paper reconsiders classical and neoclassical economics’ significance for or affinity and convergence with sociological theory. The paper identifies certain types or elements of classical and neoclassical economics that are potentially significant or convergent with sociological theory: pure market economics, the economics of society cum the “rational choice model”, and social or sociological economics. First, it argues that as pure economics economic theory’s significance for or affinity and convergence with sociological theory is low because the first is inconsistent with or divergent from the latter, notably theoretical economic sociology. Second, the paper suggests that as the economics of society economic theory’s significance for or affinity and convergence with sociological theory is non-existent or minimal, because the “rational choice model” is missing or an exception within conventional economics. Third, the paper proposes and demonstrates that classical and neoclassical economics’ main significance for or affinity and convergence with sociological theory lies in social economics as its second ingredient, alongside market economics. The paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between economic and sociological theory and economics and sociology overall.     

The case for an inhabited institutionalism in organizational research: interaction,coupling, and change reconsidered

This paper makes the case for an inhabited institutionalism by pondering questions that continue to vex institutional theory: How can we account for local activity, agency, and change without reverting to a focus on individual actors—the very kinds of actors that institutional theory was designed to critique? How is change possible in an institutional context that constructs interests and sets the very conditions for such action? Efforts to deal with these questions by inserting various forms of individual, purposive actors into institutional frameworks have created inconsistencies that threaten the overall coherence of institutional theory and move it farther from its sociological roots. To provide alternative answers, we turn to the growing line of work on “inhabited” institutions. Our exegesis of this literature has two goals. The first goal is to shift focus away from individuals and nested imagery and towards social interaction and coupling configurations. This move opens new avenues for research and helps to identify the spaces—both conceptual and empirical—and the supra-individual processes that facilitate change. This shift has important theoretical implications: incorporating social interaction alters institutional theory, and our second goal is to specify an analytic framework for this new research, an inhabited institutionalism. Inhabited institutionalism is a meso-approach for examining the recursive relationships among institutions, interactions, and organizations. It provides novel and sociologically consistent means for dealing with issues of agency and change, and a new agenda for research that can reinvigorate and reunite organizational sociology and institutional theory.

     

Family is NOT an institution: distinguishing institutions from organisations in social science and social theory

This paper addresses the use, and potential misuse, of the ‘institution’ as a key concept in sociology. The concept of the ‘institution’ is interrogated using ‘family’ as an example and new institutional economics (NIE) as a crucible. The sociological understanding of family as an ‘institution’ is challenged by the distinction between ‘institutions’ and ‘organisations’ in NIE. The blurring of generic non-sociological terms with critical sociological concepts causes confusion between institutions and organisations. This is highly problematic for understanding social change in increasingly complex systems. I conclude that the contextual embedding of sociological concepts remains important to the appropriate use of the term ‘institution’ in the social sciences.     

Writing the self: Exploring the stigma of hearing impairment

Neoclassical economic and sociological views of discrimination are compared. We summarize economic models of taste, statistical, error, and monopolistic discrimination. Economists argue that competitive market forces should lead to the demise of discrimination in the long run. After explaining these arguments, we present sociological arguments about institutional and social‐psychological mechanisms that promote the persistence of discrimination. A typology of social‐psychological feedback effects from discrimination is presented. We conclude that it is important to recognize forces promoting both the erosion and persistence of discrimination and that this requires a perspective drawing upon both sociology and economics.     

On the state of the economic in sociology: A content analysis

This article explores contemporary economic sociology by means of a content analysis of the anthologies published in the field between 1993 and 2005, with attention given to four dimensions: the economic topics covered; the relative focus on economic conflict vs. cooperation; the methodologies employed; and the relationship to the field of economics. The content analysis reveals that economic sociology (1) most commonly studies markets and national institutions (2) tends to ignore issues of class conflict (3) relies primarily on interview-based and historical methodologies, and (4) only superficially incorporates a small number of concepts from economic theory. Of particular importance is the absence of sociological investions of important macroeconomic outcomes like unemployment and economic growth. It is suggested that the field can be strengthened by following Weber's (and Schumpeter's) formulation ofSozialökonomie a multidisciplinary approach that would conjoin economic theory and history to economic sociology.     

More than just a product: Strengthening literature in sociological analysis

Contemporary sociology of literature is predominantly shaped by the research of literary production, which approaches literary works as black boxes and subordinates them to social interactions and institutions. Even sociologists who recognize usefulness of literature for its inner quality often look at literary texts as mere passive objects to be translated into sociological discourse. In proposing a new sociology of literature, I first briefly outline the history of sociological studies of literature; second, I introduce “the state of the art” in the sociology of literature; third, I explore the relationship between sociology and literature in more general terms; and lastly, I discuss approaches and ideas with the potential to become components of a new research program, which would be a powerful alternative to the mainstream paradigms in sociological studies of literature. Such a program would make it clear that sociology can greatly benefit from cooperation with literature when sociologists are sensitive to the subtleties and (especially aesthetic) specificities of literary works.     

Intervention sociology: history and foundations

Our intention is to state the main characteristics of intervention sociology, from its origins, the beginnings of which can be situated in Frédéric Le Play's monographic work carried out 150 years ago, to its present forms. Rather seldom mentioned in sociological literature or if so in the course of a paragraph or in methodological appendixes, intervention sociology, although widely practised outside the academic field, today still lacks legibility and institutional recognition. By proposing a thorough reading of the main theories and conceptions developed during the past two centuries, our article aims at explaining, through the sociological prism, the fundamental concepts of intervention sociology.     

The Corpus Status of Literature in Teaching Sociology: Novels as “Sociological Reconstruction”

Using fiction in teaching sociology involves what Harvey Sacks calls “sociological reconstruction”. Numerous comments on teaching sociology provide advice and suggestions on the use of literature and “what counts” as “sociological” literature, including specific titles. This paper goes further: while the use of literature is a routine feature of sociological accounts, discerning the relevance of a novel, or a passage within a novel, to sociological themes is an analyst’s achievement. It requires work both by the teacher and the student to recognize the relevance of fiction to sociology. Previous studies on fiction in sociology focus on the pedagogic aspects of using novels but fail to acknowledge the key problem of “sociological reconstruction” attempted through the use of novels. The paper explicates the crucial and generic issue of “corpus status”, which is fore-grounded by the use of non-sociological materials in sociology.     

LEVINE'S GERMAN TRADITION: Consolations for the Sociologist

In Visions of the Sociological Tradition Donald N. Levine presents a view of the German sociological tradition that emphasizes its origins in philosophical idealism. This paper discusses the implications of this, view for understanding the formation of sociology in Germany. The author suggests that Levine's account can be supplemented and strengthened by reconstructing the German tradition both as an effort to proceed without foundational philosophical systems and as an outgrowth of social economics and the historical school of political economy. Most importantly, Levine shares the call for sociology as the site of dialogue with that reconstructed German tradition.     

Toward a Sociology of the Person

This paper proposes a sociology of the person that focuses upon the socially defined, publicly visible beings of intersubjective experience. I argue that the sociology of the person proposed by Durkheim and Mauss is more accurately described as a sociology of institutions of the person and neglects both folk or ethnopsychologies of personhood and the interactional production of persons. I draw upon the work of Goffman to develop a sociology of the person concerned with means, processes, and relations of person production. I also propose that the work of Goffman, Foucault, and others provides insights into the contemporary technology of person production and into how its control and use affects relations of person production. I conclude with a brief outline of the theoretical connections among institutions of the person, folk psychologies, the social constitution of the person, and the prospect of a distinctively sociological psychology.     

Relations and Relationships: Clarifying the Terms of the ‘New’ Relational Economic Sociology

In economic sociology, relations and relationships have emerged as central yet poorly specified concepts. In this paper, I clarify these terms in a positive critique of the current state of the field. I then consider the ways in which the proposed framework can help analysts to bridge the divide between economics and sociology. Armed with techniques derived from formal network analysis, the new economic sociology offered the first sustained foray into economic territory, but sociological skeptics remain unsatisfied. Two broad rejoinders to this network-analytic approach emerged in the last two decades, but both correctives, nevertheless, leave the divide intact. In the last decade, however, a new paradigm is coalescing under the rubric of “relational economic sociology. While showing promise, it furthers the confusion surrounding the key concepts of “relations” and “relationships.” The proposed framework provides a foundation for constructive dialogue among the different traditions which constitute this new paradigm.     

Self-interest and the theory of action

The concept of self-interest remains underdeveloped in sociology although central to economics. Recent methodological and social trends render sociological indifference to the concept untenable. The term has enjoyed historical predominance in the West since the sixteenth century. While it is seen in modern economics as a singular motivating force, Adam Smith regarded self-interest in economic action as necessarily moderated by sympathy. In addition to its problematic economic conceptualization self-interest has an experiential basis in unequal power relations. An alternative to the concept of self-interest is presented by Amartya Sen in his account of commitment; its inconsistencies, however, render Sen's statement unsatisfactory. Differences between present and future interests indicate that the distinction between self-interested and other-interested action is not sustainable.     

Simulation as a Social Process in Organizations

An emergent research literature is starting to cohere on simulation as a sociological process within organizations. This paper shines a spotlight on this scholarship, and offers new ways to think about the dizzying array of simulation we encounter in our organizational, institutional, and everyday lives. I define simulation as an empirical social process and show how they vary in consequence by their experiential modality, their referential frame, and their perceived realism. I then document three conceptual trends in the literature: (i) treating simulation as an organizational technique for risk management; (ii) a focus on virtual reality, video games, and moral ambiguity; and (iii) studies of the impact of computer simulation on scientific knowledge production and the reorganization of some technical fields, such as weapons research, artificial intelligence, and meteorology. Organizational uncertainty tends to coalesce around disputes about the appropriate qualities and functions of a given simulation technique or technology. I conclude the paper by identifying how the sociology of simulation can connect with more established areas of contemporary research within organizations, work and occupations, and institutional sociology.     

A feminist critique of rational-choice theories: Implications for sociology

I consider the relationship between two currents affecting sociology, rational-choice theory and interdisciplinary feminist theory. In particular, I consider how the feminist critique of the separative model of self applies to one version of rational-choice theory, neoclassical economics. In discussing this I identify four assumptions of neoclassical economics: selfishness; interpersonal utility comparisons are impossible; tastes are exogenous and unchanging; and individuals are rational. I argue that each of these harmonizes best with a view of separate rather than connected selves, and that this imbalance distorts theories, particularly those that claim to understand women’s experience. These distorting assumptions are less prevalent in sociology than in economics, but some of them are implicit in some versions of sociological rational-choice and exchange theories. I conclude by using research on marital power to illustrate how removing distorting assumptions and bringing questions about separation/connection to center stage can help illuminate sociological research. Her forthcoming book,Comparable Worth: Theories and Evidence (New York: Aldine deGruyter), discusses this controversial policy issue from a perspective that draws upon sociology, economics, and feminist theory.     

生产的市场结构——基于中国市场田野调查和工业普查数据的经验研究

哈里森·怀特(Harrison White)的生产的市场结构模型在经济社会学的市场理论中占有重要地位,他将新古典企业理论嵌入到社会学的市场概念框架中,提出了经济社会学中惟一的数理模型。怀特认为,他的理论不仅为进一步改进数理模型奠定了基础,也为经验研究描绘了导航图。然而后者所指的经验研究至今寥寥无几。本文应用怀特的理论,一方面通过田野研究的方法深入了解箱包市场上生产者相互观察、建立市场的机制,另一方面通过计量分析的方法考察了多个产品市场,把握生产者相互观察形成的市场结果,在此基础上作者提出了进一步研究怀特模型的思路。     

Beyond the Time Crunch: New Directions in the Sociology of Time and Work

The sociology of work is particularly poised to study the meaning of time within institutions and organizations at its most sociological manifestation – the point where groups of people come together to accomplish joint goals. Previous work has offered useful concepts to help us understand temporality and tempography, home and work balance, temporal practices and mindsets towards time. Most of this work, however, which directly or peripherally treats time in the workplace, has focussed on the work–life balance. The actual temporal experiences of workers, however, are relatively absent in this literature. In this review article, I outline previous contributions from sociologists of work and offer ways in which work from the broader literature on the sociology of time can enhance this field. I address how future research should focus on how “time work” is accomplished in workplaces and on issues of class and gender.     

The concept of a “merit good” the ethical dimension in economic theory and the history of economic thought or the transformation of economics into socio-economics

The purpose of this paper is to defend the concept of a “merit good” and to expand its application. This is achieved by using a Kantian philosophical argument applied to the writings of foundational economists such as Adam Smith and Henry Simons (and Walter Eucken in the German literature). As a result the concept of a “merit good” is used to classify and argue for a number of governmental tasks such as the institutional arrangements to make a free market economy work, work efficiently and work in a humane way. Methodologically, this paper connects—as the work of Joseph A. Schumpeter already has—economic theory, the history of economic thought and institutional economics and thereby demonstrates that economics is necessarily about socio-economics.     

Historical institutional child abuse: Activist mobilisation and public inquiries

The abuse of children in institutional settings is an issue of ongoing social, public, and political concern internationally. While societal responses to historical abuse have been the subject of considerable scholarship in recent years, conceptualisation of the role of activism remains limited. This article aims to advance sociological and interdisciplinary perspectives on nonrecent institutional child abuse through a conceptualisation of activist mobilisation. The article begins by providing context for the emergence of institutional child abuse as a social issue. A brief overview of key themes and debates in the interdisciplinary literature is then offered, and a critical gap in current scholarship is identified in relation to activism. Drawing on illustrative examples of activist mobilisation, both in the form of survivor narratives and strategies aimed at influencing policy, the article sets out how a sociology of activism in the field of historical institutional child abuse might proceed. Through attention to the social dynamics of activism, and conceptualisation of collective action in this domain as a social movement, the article provides new insights for the field and an alternative to sociological theorisation of responses to historical institutional child abuse as simply constituting a public scandal or moral panic.     

Reexamining economic sociology: Beyond rational choice reductionism

The article aims at reexamining the origins and character of economic sociology by comparison with rational choice within the history of economic and social ideas, particularly neoclassical economic and classical sociological theory. Some suggestions for a rational choice approach to economic sociology are particularly curious in that they tend to conflate the distinct characters and origins of these two disciplines throughout this history and have in turn provided an impetus for this reexamination. Modern rational choice theorists display a predilection for reducing economic (and, all) sociology into an economic approach to human behavior, with many economic sociologists evincing some degree of lenience or benevolence vis-à-vis such tendencies. Both tendencies do not seem justified in light of the different nature and origin of economic sociology and rational choice in the history of social and economic ideas. Since the current literature lacks coherent attempts at specifying the nature and historical roots of economic sociology versus those of rational choice, the article contributes toward filling in this hole.     

The lynching of African Americans in the U.S. South: A review of sociological and historical perspectives

Research in sociology and history on the lynching of African Americans by White mobs in the U.S. South around 1900 has in recent decades grown and matured into a substantive research area in its own right. This article has four purposes. The first purpose is to review dominant sociological and historical approaches in the lynching literature. One key feature of this literature is its bifurcation into one strand of social scientific sociological lynching research and one strand of culturalist historical lynching research. As a consequence of this bifurcation, the study of lynching long lacked sustained interdisciplinary dialogue between sociology and history. The second purpose of this article is to review recent sociological studies that attempt to bridge the disjuncture between sociological and historical approaches otherwise characterizing lynching scholarship. The third purpose of this article is to review other recent studies moving sociological lynching scholarship beyond dominant approaches and foci, including investigations of averted lynchings and investigations of the individual‐level characteristics that made African Americans more or less vulnerable to White lynch mobs. The last purpose is to suggest how the contributions of lynching research have implications for understanding present‐day racial injustices and inequalities.