首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
American organizational theorists have not taken up the call to apply Bourdieu’s approach in all of its richness in part because, for better or worse, evidentiary traditions render untenable the kind of sweeping analysis that makes Bourdieu’s classics compelling. Yet many of the insights found in Bourdieu are being pursued piecemeal, in distinct paradigmatic projects that explore the character of fields, the emergence of organizational habitus, and the changing forms of capital that are key to the control of modern organizations. A number of these programs build on the same sociological classics that Bourdieu built his own theory on. These share the same lineage, even if they were not directly influenced by Bourdieu.
Frank DobbinEmail:

Frank Dobbin   is Professor of Sociology at Harvard University. His The New Economic Sociology: A Reader (Princeton University Press 2004) traces modern paradigms in economic sociology to their origins in sociological classics. His Inventing Equal Opportunity, chronicling the construction of corporate anti-discrimination strategies by human resources professionals, will be published by Princeton University Press in 2008.  相似文献   

2.
This is a discussion of a book by Kathryn Linn Geurts, Culture and the Senses. Bodily Ways of Knowing in an African Community, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002; and a book by Judith Farquhar, Appetites. Food and Sex in Post-Socialist China, Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press, 2002.
Larissa BuchholzEmail:
  相似文献   

3.
The current crisis of neoliberalism is calling into question the relevance of key international institutions. We analyze the origins, nature, and possible impacts of the crisis through comparing two such institutions: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Both originated in the post-World War II U.S.-led hegemonic order and were transformed as part of the transition to global neoliberalism. We show that while the IMF and the WTO have been part of the same hegemonic project, their distinct institutional features have put them on significantly different trajectories. Historical differences in the two institutions’ systems of rules have placed the IMF in a more vulnerable position than the WTO, which provides clues to the future contours of global economic governance.
Nitsan Chorev (Corresponding author)Email:
Sarah BabbEmail:

Nitsan Chorev   is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Brown University. She is the author of Remaking U.S. Trade Policy: from Protectionism to Globalization (Cornell University Press, 2007), and is now working on a book on the global politics of health. Sarah Babb   is Associate Professor of Sociology at Boston College. She is the author of Behind the Development Banks: Washington Politics, World Poverty, and the Wealth of Nations (University of Chicago Press, 2009), which explores the impact of American politics on the World Bank and regional development institutions.  相似文献   

4.
Using ethnographic data collected in the downtown nightlife of Athens, Georgia, we explore black males’ responses to being rejected from nightclubs via dress code enforcement in predominately white settings. We contrast these responses to the general experiences of other black males who gained access. Although race is a factor in the enforcement of dress codes, we find a fluid relationship between race, class, and taste that influences black males’ responses and experiences. We illustrate how the nuanced reality of lived racial and class experiences for many young black males problematize the narrow interpretation of a black cultural essence.
Kenneth Sean ChaplinEmail:

Reuben A. Buford May   is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Texas A&M University. His research areas include race and culture, urban ethnography, and the sociology of sport. He is the author of Living Through the Hoop: High School Basketball, Race and the American Dream (New York University Press, 2007) and Talking at Trena’s: Everyday Conversation at an African American Tavern (New York University Press, 2001). Kenneth Sean Chaplin   is a graduate student in the department of Sociology at Texas A&M University. His research interests include racial and ethnic relations and the sociology of sport.  相似文献   

5.
How to model an institution   总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2  
Institutions are linkage mechanisms that bridge across three kinds of social divides—they link micro systems of social interaction to meso (and macro) levels of organization, they connect the symbolic with the material, and the agentic with the structural. Two key analytic principles are identified for empirical research, relationality and duality. These are linked to new research strategies for the study of institutions that draw on network analytic techniques. Two hypotheses are suggested. (1) Institutional resilience is directly correlated to the overall degree of structural linkages that bridge across domains of level, meaning, and agency. (2) Institutional change is related to over-bridging, defined as the sustained juxtaposition of multiple styles within the same institutional site. Case examples are used to test these contentions. Institutional stability is examined in the case of Indian caste systems and American academic science. Institutional change is explored in the case of the rise of the early Christian church and in the origins of rock and roll music.
John W. Mohr (Corresponding author)Email:
Harrison C. WhiteEmail:

John Mohr   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He received his Ph.D. in sociology at Yale University. He has a longstanding interest in using formal network methods to analyze cultural meaning systems. Along with Roger Friedland he is the organizer of the Cultural Turn Conference series at UCSB and the co-editor of Matters of Culture (Cambridge University Press 2004). He has published a number of articles on the formal analysis of meaning structures. His current research projects include a study of faculty change agents in higher education and the rise of nano-technology as a scientific project. Harrison White   is Giddings Professor of Sociology at Columbia University and most recently author of Identity and Control: How social formations emerge (2008) and Markets from Networks (2002), both from Princeton University Press. He is currently working on a variety of writings around sociology of meaning, including linguistics, with special focus around uncertainty and switchings. White has published numerous articles, both field studies and mathematical analyses of business firms and market operation. He is a founder of the joint doctoral program between sociology, psychology, and the business school at Harvard University and University of Arizona, and has served on the board of directors of an urban system consulting firm.  相似文献   

6.
The social order of markets   总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2  
In this article I develop a proposal for the theoretical vantage point of the sociology of markets, focusing on the problem of the social order of markets. The initial premise is that markets are highly demanding arenas of social interaction, which can only operate if three inevitable coordination problems are resolved. I define these coordination problems as the value problem, the problem of competition and the cooperation problem. I argue that these problems can only be resolved based on stable reciprocal expectations on the part of market actors, which have their basis in the socio-structural, institutional and cultural embedding of markets. The sociology of markets aims to investigate how market action is structured by these macrostructures and to examine their dynamic processes of change. While the focus of economic sociology has been primarily on the stability of markets and the reproduction of firms, the conceptualization developed here brings change and profit motives more forcefully into the analysis. It also differs from the focus of the new economic sociology on the supply side of markets, by emphasizing the role of demand for the order of markets, especially in the discussion of the problems of valuation and cooperation.
Jens BeckertEmail:

Jens Beckert   is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne. Book publications include Inherited Wealth, Princeton University Press, 2008; Beyond the Market: The Social Foundations of Economic Efficiency, Princeton University Press 2002; and the International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology (co-edited with Milan Zafirovski), Routledge 2006. His research focuses on the fields of economic sociology, sociology of inheritance, organization studies, and social theory.  相似文献   

7.
In the late twentieth century, many social scientists and other social commentators came to characterize the world as evolving into an “information society.” Central to these claims was the notion that new social uses of information, and particularly application of scientific knowledge, are transforming social life in fundamental ways. Among the supposed transformations are the rise of intellectuals in social importance, growing productivity and prosperity stemming from increasingly knowledge-based economic activity, and replacement of political conflict by authoritative, knowledge-based decision-making. We trace these ideas to their origins in the Enlightenment doctrines of Saint Simon and Comte, show that empirical support for them has never been strong, and consider the durability of their social appeal.
James B. Rule (Corresponding author)Email:
Yasemin BesenEmail:

James B. Rule   is Distinguished Affiliated Scholar at the Center for the Study of Law and Society, University of California, Berkeley. He has researched and published widely on matters relating to sociological theory and the role of information in social life. His most recent books are Theory and Progress in Social Science (Cambridge University Press, 1997), Computing in Organizations; Myth and Experience (co-authored with Debra Gimlin and Sylvia Sievers, Transaction, 2002) and Privacy in Peril (Oxford University Press, 2007). Yasemin Besen   focuses on young people in the United States in her work, which combines qualitative and quantitative methods. Her research interests include teenage labor, gender, and inequality. Her work has been published in Contexts, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, NWSAJ, and Equal Opportunities International. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. She is currently Assistant Professor of Sociology at Montclair State University.  相似文献   

8.
As President Nixon once observed, “we are all Keynesians.” And we do indeed live in a macroeconomic world, essentially, as defined and elucidated by Keynes. But Keynes himself is underrepresented in both political science and in mainstream economics. This is a costly intellectual error. Keynes’ prodigious writings, as well as his actions, offer a treasure trove of inspiration, analysis, and insight. This article considers four themes in Keynes’ oeuvre that are especially worthy of revisiting: the importance of economic inequality, the potentially fragile underpinnings of international economic order, the inherent dysfunctions of the international monetary economy, and, perhaps most important, Keynes’ philosophy and its relationship to economic inquiry.
Jonathan KirshnerEmail:

Jonathan Kirshner   is Professor of Government and Director of the Peace Studies Program at Cornell University. He is the author of Currency and Coercion, the Political Economy of International Monetary Power (Princeton University Press, 1995) and Appeasing Bankers: Financial Caution on the Road to War (Princeton University Press, 2007), and the Editor of Monetary Orders: Ambiguous Economics, Ubiquitous Politics (Cornell University Press, 2003), and Globalization and National Security (Routledge, 2006). Professor Kirshner’s research focuses on the politics of money and finance, as well as economics and national security. He is the co-editor of the multi-disciplinary book series, “Cornell Studies in Money,” and is currently working on projects relating to the future of the dollar as an international currency.  相似文献   

9.
Although a central construct for sociologists, the concept of institution continues to elude clear and full specification. One reason for this lack of clarity is that about 50 years ago empirical researchers in the field of sociology turned their gaze downward, away from macro-sociological constructs in order to focus their attention on middle-range empirical projects. It took almost 20 years for the concept of the institution to work its back onto the empirical research agenda of mainstream sociologists. The new institutional project in organizational sociology led the way. Since then, scholars in this tradition have achieved a great deal but there is still much more to accomplish. Here, future directions for research are considered by reviewing how the concept of the institution has come to be treated by mainstream philosophers, sociologists of science and technology studies, and social network theorists.
John W. Mohr (Corresponding author)Email:
Roger Friedland (Corresponding author)Email:

John W. Mohr   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He received his Ph.D. in sociology at Yale University. He has a longstanding interest in using formal network methods to analyze cultural meaning systems. Along with Roger Friedland, he is the organizer of the Cultural Turn Conference series at UCSB and the co-editor of Matters of Culture (Cambridge University Press 2004). He has published a number of articles on the formal analysis of meaning structures. His current research projects include a study of faculty change agents in higher education and the rise of nano-technology as a scientific project. This material is based [in part] upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement No. 0531184. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Roger Friedland   is Professor of Religious Studies and Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He co-authored with Harold Zelmann The Fellowship: Frank Lloyd Wright and the Taliesin Fellowship (2006), with John Mohr Matters of Culture (2004), and authored “Money, Sex and God: The Erotic Logic of Religious Nationalism” (2002). He is currently working on politicized religion as a case of institutional politics and on the relations among religion, sexuality, and love. His latest essay is “Institution, Practice and Ontology: Towards a Religious Sociology” to appear in Ideology and Organizational Institutionalism, Research in the Sociology of Organizations.  相似文献   

10.
11.
Bourdieu and organizational analysis   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
Despite some promising steps in the right direction, organizational analysis has yet to exploit fully the theoretical and empirical possibilities inherent in the writings of Pierre Bourdieu. While certain concepts associated with his thought, such as field and capital, are already widely known in the organizational literature, the specific ways in which these terms are being used provide ample evidence that the full significance of his relational mode of thought has yet to be sufficiently apprehended. Moreover, the almost complete inattention to habitus, the third of Bourdieu’s major concepts, without which the concepts of field and capital (at least as he deployed them) make no sense, further attests to the misappropriation of his ideas and to the lack of appreciation of their potential usefulness. It is our aim in this paper, by contrast, to set forth a more informed and comprehensive account of what a relational – and, in particular, a Bourdieu-inspired – agenda for organizational research might look like. Accordingly, we examine the implications of his theoretical framework for interorganizational relations, as well as for organizations themselves analyzed as fields. The primary advantage of such an approach, we argue, is the central place accorded therein to the social conditions under which inter- and intraorganizational power relations are produced, reproduced, and contested. Emirbayer and Johnson are equal co-authors of this article
Mustafa Emirbayer (Corresponding author)Email:
Victoria JohnsonEmail:

Mustafa Emirbayer   is Professor of Sociology at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. He is the author of numerous articles on pragmatist sociological theory, cultural analysis, and Bourdieusian sociology, including “Pragmatism, Bourdieu, and Collective Emotions in Contentious Politics” (with Chad Goldberg, Theory and Society 2005), “Bourdieu and Social Work” (with Eva Williams, Social Service Review 2005), and “Manifesto for a Relational Sociology” (American Journal of Sociology 1997). He is currently at work on two companion volumes on race (both with Matthew Desmond): an undergraduate textbook entitled The Sociology of Racial Domination (McGraw-Hill, forthcoming) and a theoretical study entitled The Theory of Racial Domination. Victoria Johnson   is Assistant Professor of Organizational Studies at the University of Michigan. She is the author of Backstage at the Revolution: How the Royal Paris Opera Survived the End of the Old Regime, to be published in 2008 by the University of Chicago Press. She also lead-edited the interdisciplinary volume Opera and Society in Italy and France from Monteverdi to Bourdieu (Cambridge University Press 2007). Her current research focuses on mission and identity shifts in U.S. botanical gardens from the nineteenth century to the present.  相似文献   

12.
A new version of the age-old controversy between religion and science has been launched by today’s intelligent design movement. Although ostensibly concerned simply with combating Darwinism, this new creationism seeks to drive a “wedge” into the materialist view of the world, originating with the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus and manifested in modern times by Darwin, Marx, and Freud. Intelligent design proponents thus can be seen as challenging not only natural and physical science but social science as well. In this article, we attempt to explain the long history of this controversy, stretching over millennia, and to defend science (especially social science) against the criticisms of intelligent design proponents – by defending science’s materialist roots.
Brett Clark (Corresponding author)Email:
John Bellamy FosterEmail:
Richard YorkEmail:

Brett Clark   received his Ph.D. from the University of Oregon and is the Editorial Director of Monthly Review Press. His research interests are ecology, political economy, and science. He has published articles and review essays in Theory and Society, The Sociological Quarterly, Organization & Environment, and Critical Sociology. He received the 2007 Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association for a series of articles (one of which was the article “Carbon Metabolism: Global Capitalism, Climate Change, and the Biospheric Rift,” published in Theory and Society in 2005) with Richard York. John Bellamy Foster   is Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and editor of Monthly Review (New York). He is the author of The Theory of Monopoly Capitalism (1986); The Vulnerable Planet (1994); “Marx’s Theory of Metabolic Rift,” American Journal of Sociology (1999); Marx’s Ecology (2000); Ecology Against Capitalism (2002); Naked Imperialism (2006); and (with Paul Burkett) “Metabolism, Energy, and Entropy in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy,” Theory and Society (2006). Richard York   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and co-editor of the Sage journal Organization & Environment. His research focuses on human interaction with the natural environment and the philosophy, history, and sociology of science. He has published articles in American Sociological Review, Gender & Society, Rural Sociology, Social Problems, Social Science Research, Sociological Forum, The Sociological Quarterly, Theory and Society, and other scholarly journals. He has twice (2004 and 2007) received the Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association.  相似文献   

13.
Neutrality has been the classic answer of the liberal state to religious and cultural difference. A number of multicultural critics recently debunked it as “myth” and group power in disguise. Comparing Islamic headscarf laws in France and Germany, I argue that neutrality is more complex and multifaceted than this. The comparison shows that neutrality leaves space for particularistic and universalistic, unity- and rights-oriented stances, the first located in the sphere of democratic politics, the second in the legal–constitutional sphere. Recent headscarf laws may then be understood as political backlash against the rights-oriented neutrality that has emerged in the legal spheres of both countries.
Christian JoppkeEmail:

Christian Joppke   is Professor of Politics in the Graduate School of Government, American University of Paris. His most recent book is “Selecting by Origin: Ethnic Migration in the Liberal State” (Harvard University Press, 2005). Currently he is writing a book on citizenship and immigration for Polity Press. Together with John Torpey (CUNY, Graduate Center), he is also conducting research on the institutional accommodation of Islam in North America and Western Europe. This research is funded by the Swiss Foundation for Population, Migration and Environment (PME) and the International Metropolis Project.  相似文献   

14.
Elite college admissions exemplify processes of social closure in which status-group conflict, organizational self-interest, the strategic use of cultural ideals of merit, and broader social trends and contingent historical events interweave to shape institutional power in the United States. The Chosen, Jerome Karabel’s monumental study of the history of college admissions at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton from 1900 to 2005, offers a political sociology of elite recruitment and a cultural and social history of the definition of merit that has guided these three schools and shaped much current thinking about college admissions. As Max Weber reminded us, the very definition of cultural ideals of an epoch bear the stamp of elite group domination: not cultural ideals but cultural interests and their strategic uses guide institutional power. The book provides an impressive empirical demonstration of that proposition: it identifies four different definitions of merit as organizational gatekeeping tools that have guided Harvard, Yale, and Princeton over the last hundred years and shows how these definitions were molded by status-group conflict and organizational interests. This essay outlines the central arguments of Karabel’s book; it identifies key contributions for our understanding of the history, culture, organizational interests, and politics of these three institutions; it highlights the social closure framework guiding the analysis; and it reflects on a fundamental ambiguity in Karabel’s thinking about meritocratic ideals as governing principles for modern stratified societies. A review essay on Jerome Karabel, The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2005,
David L. SwartzEmail:

David L. Swartz   is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004). He is a Senior Editor and Book Review Editor for Theory and Society. His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory, and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu.  相似文献   

15.
The dichotomy between emotion and rationality has been one of the most enduring of sociological theory. This article attempts to bypass this dichotomy by examining how emotion and rationality are conjoined in the practice of the choice of a mate. We posit the fundamental role of culture in determining the nature of this intertwinement. We explore the culturally embedded intertwining of emotion and rationality through the notion of modal configuration. Modal configuration includes five key features: reflexivity, techniques, modal emphasis, modal overlap, and modal sequencing. We apply this framework to the topic of partner selection. Comparing primary and secondary sources on pre-modern partner selection and on internet dating, we show that emotion and rationality were intertwined in both periods but that what differs between them is precisely the emotion-rationality modality.
Eva IllouzEmail:

Eva Illouz   Is Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. She is the author of five books: Consuming the Romantic Utopia: Love and the Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (University of California Press, 1997), The Culture of Capitalism (2002, in Hebrew); Oprah Winfrey and the Glamour of Misery: An Essay on Popular Culture (2003), Cold Intimacies (Polity Press, 2007); and Saving the Modern Soul: Therapy, Emotions, and the Culture of Self-Help (University of California Press, 2008). Shoshannah Finkelman   completed an MA in Sociology and Anthropology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in December 2008. She received a BA in English literature from Kenyon College, and studied for a year at Oxford University  相似文献   

16.
Not many years ago both anthropology and political science experienced internal disputes—in the first case over the publication of a book accusing a noted anthropologist of endangering indigenous subjects and in the second over the nature of the field. While the first led to polarization, the second produced a partial convergence and modest reforms. This article examines the two processes and seeks the key mechanisms that produced those differences, closing with a call for broadening the study of contentious politics to cover non-public controversies like the ones examined in this article.
Sidney TarrowEmail:

Sidney Tarrow   teaches Political Science and Sociology at Cornell University, where he specializes in social movements and contentious politics. Tarrow’s first book was Peasant Communism in Southern Italy (Yale, 1967). His next project on contentious politics was a reconstruction of Italian protest cycle of the late 1960s, Democracy and Disorder (Oxford, 1989). With Cambridge Press, he published Power in Movement (1998), Dynamics of Contention (2001, along with Doug McAdam and Charles Tilly), and The New Transnational Activism (2005). His latest book (with Charles Tilly) is Contentious Politics (Paradigm, 2007). Tarrow is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He is currently working on a project on “human rights at war.”  相似文献   

17.
By virtually dominating French intellectual life (literature, philosophy, culture) during the early post-World War II period, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) embodied what Pierre Bourdieu calls a “total intellectual” – one who responds to and helps frame public debate on all the intellectual and political issues of the day. During his lifetime and even after his death in 1980, Sartre’s thinking and political engagements provoked sharp reactions, both positive and negative, in France and abroad. Marxism, decolonization struggles, and violence are three key themes on which Sartre’s public positions continue to generate considerable debate – a debate that remains relevant today.
David L. Swartz (Corresponding author)Email:
Vera L. ZolbergEmail:

David L. Swartz   is Assistant Professor of Sociology and teaches in the Core Curriculum at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press, 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004). His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Swartz is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society. Vera L. Zolberg   is Professor of Sociology at the New School for Social Research, New York City, where she has taught for over 20 years. In addition, she has taught at Purdue University, was visiting lecturer at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, held the Chair in Sociology of Art, University of Amsterdam, as Boekmanstichting Professor, and was visiting Research Associate at the CNRS in Paris. Zolberg has served as President of the Research Committee in the Sociology of the Arts of the International Sociological Association, and Chair of the Culture Section of the American Sociological Association. Among her publications are Outsider Art: Contesting Boundaries in Contemporary Culture, with J.M. Cherbo (Cambridge University Press, 1997); and Constructing a Sociology of the Arts (Cambridge University Press, 1990). She is co-editor, with David Swartz, of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004), and author of many articles. Her research interests include: contemporary and historical cultural policy and politics, urbanism and culture, museums, African art, and the sociology of collective memory. Zolberg is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society.  相似文献   

18.
This article argues that while elements of Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology are increasingly employed in American sociology, it is rare to find all three of Bourdieu’s master concepts—habitus, capital, and field—incorporated into a single study. Moreover, these concepts are seldom deployed within a relational perspective that was fundamental to Bourdieu’s thinking. The article “Bourdieu and Organizational Analysis” by Mustafa Emirbayer and Victoria Johnson is a welcomed exception, for it draws on all three of Bourdieu’s pillar concepts to propose a relational approach to the study of organizations. It both reframes existing thinking about organizations, particularly from the neo-institutional and resource dependence schools, and indicates new directions for research in organizations to move. This paper evaluates their contribution calling attention to its many strengths and suggesting a few points that need future clarification and elaboration.
David L. SwartzEmail:

David L. Swartz   is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004). He is a Senior Editor and Book Review Editor for Theory and Society. His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory, and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu.  相似文献   

19.
Remittances by immigrants and temporary workers of Indian origin in industrialized countries are a growing part of India’s economy. In this exploratory study we examine the social and economic characteristics affecting the remittance pattern of working households (or families) of Indian origin residing in the United States. As most previous studies have been undertaken at the macroeconomic level, our main contribution lies in identifying the household level factors that may influence remittances. Using an online and a mail-in survey of 39 households we find some of the significant factors affecting remittances. We also validate some of the remittance-related policies of the Indian government.
S. Aaron Hegde (Corresponding author)Email:

Rupayan Gupta   is currently Assistant Professor of Economics at Roger Williams University, Rhode Island, USA. He received his PhD in economics from Iowa State University. His current research focuses on the political economy of international conflict, design of international institutions, the role of media in exposing corruption, and the costs and benefits of international migration. S. Aaron Hegde   is Assistant Professor of Economics and Director of the Environmental Resource Management Program at California State University, Bakersfield. He received his PhD in economics from North Carolina State University, where he focused on risk management within the broiler industry. His current research focuses on migration, especially undocumented migration; agricultural economics of developing countries; risk management and environmental issues.  相似文献   

20.
Transference enactments play a central role in clinical supervision regardless of whether supervisors or supervisees consciously recognize or acknowledge their presence. Supervisors who do recognize enactments better understand the core issues that interfere with supervisees’ capacity to relate therapeutically to patients. Supervisory process is markedly enhanced when supervisors consciously study manifestations of transference within the supervisory relationship and respond to them correctively. Corrective interventions, whether purposeful or unintentional, expand supervisees’ relational and self-reflective capacities.
Gerald SchamessEmail:
  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号