Social Divisions, Social Mobilities and Social Research

Methodological Issues after 40 Years

Dados Bibliográficos

ID2321723
AutoresGeoff Payne (0000-0002-0622-5388, University of Plymouth, autor correspondente)
Ano2007
Volume41
Fascículo5
Páginas901-915
Data de publicação2007-10-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoSociology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0038-0385 • E-ISSN: 1469-8684
EditoraSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0038038507080444
OpenAlexW1968539841
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas11
Referências citadas25

As sociology diversified, and under other academic pressures, British sociologists became 'hyper-specialized' in subject expertise and methodology. Exploring multidimensional social life requires knowing about more than one field and having skills in more than one method. The retreat from quantitative methods, however good our qualitative methods, loses opportunities to contribute to important issues, particularly those in the public arena, at the boundaries of the discipline, or which take numerical form. This argument is developed through three recent examples: a critique of Erikson's view of British sociology and the BSA; the socio-economic circumstances of minority ethnic groups; and the isolation of social mobility analysis from political discourse. An approach based on an integrated view of social divisions and expanded methodological pluralism, in which we moderate our claims to sociological generalization, is proposed as a way forward

Argument (complex analysis) · Epistemology · Ethnic group · Field (mathematics) · Mobilities · Pluralism (philosophy) · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Social science · Sociological theory · Sociology · Subject (documents) · Anthropology · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law · Social and Cultural Dynamics · Social Capital and Networks