Suchergebnisse

[No imprint] ; "Reprinted for private circulation from the Journal of political economy, v. 25, no. 4, Apr., 1918." ; Caption title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The activity of social research has been much discussed in recent years. It is examined here as a social process, with special attention to the participation of different groups of people. Four modes of doing research are identified. The framework accommodates and shows close relationships between established modes of research which generally have been seen to be substantially different. At the same time it includes modes which are more participatory in character and which have important implications for undertaking research, the development of theory, and the functioning of social groups, including society.

Although it is evident in routine decision-making and a crucial vehicle of rationalization, commensuration as a general social process has been given little consideration by sociologists. This article defines commensuration as the comparison of different entities according to a common metric, notes commensuration's long history as an instrument of social thought, analyzes commensuration as a mode of power, and discusses the cognitive and political stakes inherent in calling something incommensurable. We provide a framework for future empirical study of commensuration and demonstrate how this analytic focus can inform established fields of sociological inquiry.

To gain an in-depth understanding of legitimacy as a general social process, we review contemporary approaches to legitimacy within two areas of sociology: social psychology and organizations. A comparison of these distinct approaches allows us to explain the process, both in implicit and explicit ways at different levels of analysis, through which a social object is construed as legitimate. This comparison also suggests four stages in the process by which new social objects, both individual (worthy/unworthy individuals) and collective (organizational forms), gain legitimation: innovation, local validation, diffusion, and general validation. We then show how legitimation of the status quo—that is, the acceptance of widespread consensual schemas/beliefs in the larger society—often fosters the stability of nonoptimal actions and practices that are created as a result of these new individual and collective social objects. Finally, we discuss how consensual beliefs such as status beliefs and cultural capital fuel the reproduction of inefficiency and inequality in groups and organizations.

Tavistock Press was established as a co-operative venture between the Tavistock Institute and Routledge & Kegan Paul (RKP) in the 1950s to produce a series of major contributions across the social sciences. This volume is part of a 2001 reissue of a selection of those important works which have since gone out of print, or are difficult to locate. Published by Routledge, 112 volumes in total are being brought together under the name The International Behavioural and Social Sciences Library: Classics from the Tavistock Press. Reproduced here in facsimile, this volume was originally published in

Past similarities in the outward appearance of domestic process in two adjacent villages of diverse origin in the Italian Alps resulted from shared ecological pressures, but contrasting modes of integration into the national political economy were decisive in producing differences between villages in the ways in which authority was developed and distributed within the domestic realm, and in processes of interaction between domestic groups. These contrasts have in turn influenced response to recent changes in the nature of village integration into the state, which have set domestic process moving in new directions.