Suchergebnisse

'Dialogical networks' are communications that occur in mass media. One of their characteristics is that contributions of individual actors - politicians, journalists, representatives of pressure groups, etc - are distributed in time & space. (A politician can, for instance, react in the media to what another politician expressed publicly elsewhere). Another central property of dialogical networks is that an individual's contribution to a network can be duplicated, or even multiplicated (eg, what is said in a TV studio may be reproduced in several newspapers). Working in a broadly ethnomethodological & conversation analytical framework, we focus on two aspects of sequential organization - adjacency pair structures & repair structures - with the aim to clarify the respects in which they differ in dialogical networks & in everyday conversations.

The article focuses on the role of informality in the life of post-communist societies in Central Europe. Its goal is to question the current negative connotation of informal networks in the context of post-communist society. For this purpose it analyses the criteria used in the relevant literature to distinguish between 'good' and 'bad' informal networks. Two main factors (the situational factor and the factor of relationship quality) are analysed from the perspective of their impact on the orientation of informal networks and their ability to predict which networks will have a positive or a negative influence on societal development. The author argues that neither of these two factors alone can fully explain the positive or negative orientation of a particular informal network in a given society. Instead he proposes a solution that combines several dimensions of both factors. In conclusion he identifies five types of informal networks in post-communist society: predatory, redistributory, helping, operating, and participative networks.

The aim of the article is to describe the relations between institutions in the public, private and non-profit sectors that are considered the most important actors of negotiation and decision-making in local development. These institutions and the relations between them are defined as a social network. A study was carried out in the small Czech towns of Blatná, Český Krumlov and Velké Meziříčí, and data were collected in 2007 and 2008. The first part of the article describes the institutional actors, the collection of the relational data, and the context of the three towns that were studied. The analytical part consists of social network analysis. Basic quantitative characteristics are used to describe and compare the social networks of the institutional actors in the local development of the three towns. The conclusions indicate the unconditional significance of local public administration institutions and the significance of other local institutions; relations to extra-local institutions are rather weak. A section on methodology at the end of the article contains methodological notes on Hellinger divergence and SNA.

EU programme documents designed to influence the social policies of the member states are filled with concepts of social exclusion and social inclusion. This paper aims to clarify these concepts as they are employed in academic and public policy discourse and to discuss the societal function of this discourse and the impact of the European agenda of social inclusion. The authors show that although concepts of social exclusion and social inclusion are far from straightforward in meaning, their influence on public policy discourse and agenda is evident. The reason is that they redirect social policy towards a multidimensional approach, towards balancing rights and obligations, and towards more complex but also local and individualised policies, though the corresponding discourse bears the normative features of a social 'vision'. The EU's social policy agenda exhibits aspirations towards and some potential for achieving real policy change. On the other hand, there are reservations about its true impact. In this respect, the specifi c societal and political context of its implementation plays a crucial role.

This article, published in connection with the recent death of Otis Dudley Duncan (16 November 2004), sets out to provide a critical summary of the development - from its beginnings in the 1960s up to its final revision & modification in 1983 - of the socio-psychological model of the status attainment process. The article not only looks at the classic model of the social stratification process of Blau & Duncan, but also examines the influence of one of the founders of the socio-psychological branch of the study of social stratification, W. H. Sewell. Special attention is devoted to the development of the so-called Wisconsin model, primarily the work of William H. Sewell & his student, Robert M. Hauser, who, while as a student of Duncan also, considerably contributed to the use of structural modelling in sociology. The article concludes with a brief discussion of the main critical reactions to the socio-psychological model emphasising the 'allocational' paradigm of interpretation of the reproduction of social inequalities. The article should primarily help students of sociology gain an orientation in the massive amount of often poorly accessible literature on one of the most cited of sociology's 'products'.