Social Sciences
Social Stratification Theories
Social stratification theories seek to explain how and why societies are divided into hierarchical layers based on factors such as wealth, power, and social status. These theories explore the impact of inequality on individuals and groups, and how it shapes their opportunities and life chances. They also examine the mechanisms through which social stratification is perpetuated or challenged within societies.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
12 Key excerpts on "Social Stratification Theories"
eBook - PDF- Ruth Wodak, Barbara Johnstone, Paul E Kerswill, Ruth Wodak, Barbara Johnstone, Paul E Kerswill(Authors)
- 2010(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications Ltd(Publisher)
In sociology, the term ‘social stratifi-cation’ refers to the hierarchical arrangement of groups within a society, and the term can be used in both broad and narrow senses. In a narrow sense, stratification ‘can imply a commitment to a particular way of thinking about inequality, as seeing society as structured layers. … In the increasingly used wider meaning, stratification is concerned with all facets, mechanisms and proc-esses that generate, sustain, and describe social inequalities’ (Savage, 2005: 250). Sociological studies of social stratification tend to investigate systematic, structured inequality along a few different dimensions. A first major concern is how to identify the different forms of stratification that are found in a society and how they are organized. For example, achieved characteristics such as power, wealth and prestige play a significant role in dividing people into hierarchically-ranked social groups, but so do ascribed characteristics like race and gender. In a given society, which of these forms are found and which are most relevant? Other aspects of this first major concern surround how social classes or castes, etc., should be labeled and imposed (e.g. upper-middle class, lower-working class). A second major concern is how conceptually to approach social stratification, to develop various theories about its forms, to compare stratification across societies, and to examine how stratification changes over time. For example, Marx traced the history of various modes of production in different societies and, as a result of his study, predicted the collapse of the capitalist system. Finally, a third major concern in studies of social stratifica-tion deals with the processes and conditions of stratification – in short, how groups in power maintain their privileges, how disadvantaged groups try to get ahead, and the consequences of cohesive or conflicting social relationships in any given society.
eBook - PDFInequality
A Contemporary Approach to Race, Class, and Gender
- Lisa A. Keister, Darby E. Southgate(Authors)
- 2022(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
The Structure of Stratification Theories about social stratification also attempt to explain the nature (or structure) of stratification. Most of the earliest theories described stratification as class-based. Class- based theories assume distinct groups, or social classes, and explain why each class has (or lacks) certain resources and advantages. Social class refers to groups of people with similar education, income, wealth, occupation, and prestige. People in the same social class also often have similar tastes and mannerisms, and they may share a general ideology as well. Lower, middle, and upper classes are the basic classes, but it is possible to identify more detailed class groupings. Later theorists began to perceive society as a more continuous progression from rich to poor. These gradational theories assume that society is a continuum Power Privilege Prestige x, y, z Altruism Figure 2.1 Lenski’s theory of social stratification. 1 This is actually Weber’s definition of power, which Lenski acknowledged (1966: 44). The Structure of Stratification 39 along which people can be arrayed rather than focusing on distinct classes. Gradational theories usually focus on socioeconomic status (SES), a single measure of well-being that generally incorporates income, wealth, occupation, and education. The remainder of this chapter outlines class-based theories of stratification; subsequent chapters discuss grad- ational theories in describing current research and modern trends in inequality. Marx Karl Marx (1818–1883) was one of the most influential theorists in the social sciences, including the study of social stratification and inequality. He was born in Trier, Germany, to a relatively prosperous family; his father was a lawyer and politician. Marx studied law at the Universities of Bonn and Berlin, and received a Ph.D.
eBook - PDF- Tonja R. Conerly, San Jacinto College, Kathleen Holmes, Northern Essex Community College, Asha Lal Tamang, North Hennepin Community College(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Openstax(Publisher)
FIGURE 9.2 In the upper echelons of the working world, people with the most power reach the top. These people make the decisions and earn the most money. The majority of Americans will never see the view from the top. (Credit: Alex Proimos/flickr) Sociologists use the term social stratification to describe the system of social standing. Social stratification refers to a society’s categorization of its people into rankings based on factors like wealth, income, education, family background, and power. Geologists also use the word “stratification” to describe the distinct vertical layers found in rock. Typically, society’s layers, made of people, represent the uneven distribution of society’s resources. Society views the people with more resources as the top layer of the social structure of stratification. Other groups of people, with fewer and fewer resources, represent the lower layers. An individual’s place within this stratification is called socioeconomic status (SES). 9.1 • What Is Social Stratification? 237 FIGURE 9.3 Strata in rock illustrate social stratification. People are sorted, or layered, into social categories. Many factors determine a person’s social standing, such as wealth, income, education, family background, and power. (Credit: Just a Prairie Boy/flickr) Most people and institutions in the United States indicate that they value equality, a belief that everyone has an equal chance at success. In other words, hard work and talent—not inherited wealth, prejudicial treatment, institutional racism, or societal values—determine social mobility. This emphasis on choice, motivation, and self-effort perpetuates the American belief that people control their own social standing. However, sociologists recognize social stratification as a society-wide system that makes inequalities apparent. While inequalities exist between individuals, sociologists are interested in larger social patterns.
eBook - ePub- Vijai P. Singh(Author)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
This pattern of increasing inequality reaches its peak in agrarian societies, but reverses itself in advanced industrial societies. Power is central to the distributive sytsem; however, it is fluid and shows variations in its effect in different historical periods and in different technological contexts. In advanced industrial societies, for instance, social, economic and political structures become more differentiated and various occupational groups engage in bargaining which results in a more equitable distribution of society’s resources. 43 Whether Lenski succeeded in his initial aim of developing a synthesis theory may still be debated by many, but his attempt has certainly provided a less rigid approach for studying stratification. The Concept of Social Stratification Currently, there is a reasonable degree of agreement among social scientists regarding the definition of social stratification. Social stratification refers to the process of placing differentiated social units along an idealized continuum, or to the conceptualization of these social units into categories which share a relatively common position with respect to a socially validated scale of specific or generalized characteristics. These units may be individuals, families, classes, nations or any identifiable unit that one might conceptualize in an hierarchial order. In principle, a stratification system can be unidimensional or multidimensional. The type of system should be based upon the kind of society that is being studied and the nature of association among the elements of the stratification system. In other words, “a society characterized by perfect correlation between all relevant criterion variables has a one dimensional stratification system. Conversely, one in which the average correlation is lower will be multidimensional
eBook - PDFSociology
The Essentials
- Margaret Andersen, Margaret Andersen, Howard Taylor(Authors)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
Status differences can become organized into a hierarchical social system. Social stratification is a relatively fixed, hierarchical arrangement in society by which groups have different access to resources, power, and perceived social worth. Social stratification is a system of structured social inequality. Again using sports as an example, you can see that many of the players earn extremely high salaries, although most do not. Those who do are among the elite in this system of inequality, but the own- ers control the resources of the teams and hold the most power in this system. Sponsors (including major corporations and media networks) are the economic engines on which this system of stratifica- tion rests. Fans are merely observers who pay to watch the teams play, but the revenue they generate is essential for keeping this system intact. Altogether, sports are systems of stratification because the Copyright 2020 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. CHAPTER 8 Social Class and Social Stratification 177 See for Yourself Take a shopping trip to different stores and observe the appearance of stores serving different economic groups.
eBook - PDF- Heather Griffiths, Nathan Keirns, Eric Strayer, Susan Cody-Rydzewski, Gail Scaramuzzo, Tommy Sadler, Sally Vyain, Jeff Bry, Faye Jones(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Openstax(Publisher)
Social mobility describes a shift from one social class to another. Class traits, also called class markers, are the typical behaviors, customs, and norms that define each class. 9.3 Global Stratification and Inequality Global stratification compares the wealth, economic stability, status, and power of countries as a whole. By comparing income and productivity between nations, researchers can better identify global inequalities. 9.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Social Stratification Social stratification can be examined from different sociological perspectives—functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism. The functionalist perspective states that systems exist in society for good reasons. Conflict theorists observe that stratification promotes inequality, such as between rich business owners and poor workers. Symbolic interactionists examine stratification from a micro-level perspective. They observe how social standing affects people’s everyday interactions and how the concept of “social class” is constructed and maintained through everyday interactions. Section Quiz 9.1 What Is Social Stratification? 1. What factor makes caste systems closed? a. They are run by secretive governments. b. People cannot change their social standings. c. Most have been outlawed. d. They exist only in rural areas. 2. What factor makes class systems open? a. They allow for movement between the classes. b. People are more open-minded. c. People are encouraged to socialize within their class. Chapter 9 | Social Stratification in the United States 199 d. They do not have clearly defined layers. 3. Which of these systems allows for the most social mobility? a. Caste b. Monarchy c. Endogamy d. Class 4. Which person best illustrates opportunities for upward social mobility in the United States? a. First-shift factory worker b. First-generation college student c. Firstborn son who inherits the family business d. First-time interviewee who is hired for a job 5.
eBook - PDF- Bryan S Turner(Author)
- 1999(Publication Date)
- SAGE Publications Ltd(Publisher)
CHAPTER 12 THE SOCIOLOGY OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION Introduction In the twentieth century, the sociological analysis of social class, and more broadly the study of social stratification, became a basic and defining char-acteristic of the sociological curriculum and a major focus of empirical research. In the universities, sociology as a discipline developed in part as a contribution to the analysis of the negative functions and consequences of social inequality in industrial capitalism, where social inequality was seen to stem largely from economic inequality and ultimately therefore from the location of individuals and families within the class structure of industrial capitalism. Sociology attempted to provide answers to the question, how does economic class difference function in a welfare-capitalist system? Although the study of social class came, as a consequence, to structure the sociological understanding of industrial society, there were traditional difficulties with the analysis of class. These analytical problems were simple, but enduring: 1 How can class be adequately defined so as to distinguish clearly class inequality from other forms of stratification? 2 How many classes are there? 3 What, if any, are the main patterns of mobility between classes? 4 Is class inequality an inevitable, necessary and permanent feature of human society, or merely a consequence of the growth of the capitalist mode of production? Class analysis became, therefore, an essential feature of the study of a capitalist industrial system and the political search for alternatives, parti-cularly in the debate about socialism as a revolutionary stage of social history beyond capitalism.
eBook - PDFCultural Anthropology
An Applied Perspective
- Gary Ferraro, Susan Andreatta(Authors)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
Some people—and entire groups of people— have little or no access to the basic resources of the societies. Various groups in stratified societies, then, are noticeably different in social position, wealth, lifestyle, access to power, and standard of living. The unequal access to rewards found in stratified societies is gener-ally inheritable from one generation to the next. Although distinctions in wealth, power, and prestige began to appear in the early Neolithic period (approxi-mately 10,000 years ago), the emergence of truly strati-fied societies is closely associated with the rise of civiliza-tion approximately 5,500 years ago. A basic prerequisite for civilization is a population with a high degree of role specialization. As societies become more specialized, the system of social stratification also becomes more com-plex. Different occupations or economic interest groups do not have the same access to wealth, power, and pres-tige but rather are ranked relative to one another. As a general rule, the greater the role specialization in a society, the more complex is its system of stratification. Class versus Caste Social scientists generally recognize two different types of stratified societies: those based on class and those based on caste . The key to understanding this funda-mental distinction is social mobility . In class systems, a certain amount of upward and downward social mobility exists. In other words, individuals can change their social position dramatically within a lifetime. Individuals, through diligence, intelligence, and good luck, could go from rags to riches; conversely, people born to millionaire parents could wind up as home-less street people (Newman 1988). Caste societies, on the other hand, have little or no social mobility. Membership in a caste is determined by birth and lasts throughout one’s lifetime.
eBook - PDF- David Grusky(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
A structural theory of inequality is one in which inequality is created by relationships between positions. The structural explanation may be complete, as in the Marxist theory of ex-ploitation; or it may be partial with the theory positing an interaction between characteris-tics of position and characteristics of person. The most obvious examples of a partial ex-planation are functionalist theories of the Davis and Moore (1945) variety and organi-zational theories of inequality that emphasize motivational consequences of organizations, such as internal labor markets (e.g., Stinch-combe 1974; Serensen 1983; Lazear and Rosen 1981). In the discussion that follows, I detail the most important status and class concepts. I try to show that the basic choices are not be-tween class and status but between concepts that are useful for different types of research tasks. There is more to say about class than about status. The claims about the theoretical power of the class concepts have been greater. Social Status: Welfare or Honor? Sociology students are often told that Weber's discussion of status groups is the original source for the concept of status. This is a bit bizarre. Weber did not use the word status or status group. He used the words stand and The Basic Concepts of Stratification Research ehre, which most would translate as estate and honor, in describing what these groups were about. We are meant to be brought back to, or reminded of, the world of feudalism and knights. This world was not so far from Wilhelmian Germany as it is from the con-temporary United States. In any event, We-ber's ideas about this had little to do with the concept of socioeconomic status that pro-duces the standard variable in all of status-attainment research and the standard inde-pendent variable in much other sociological research, especially of the survey variety.
eBook - PDFThe analysis of social change reconsidered
A sociological study
- J. A. Ponsioen(Author)
- 2019(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
To us, the question is rather whether the study in stratification provides a favourable introduction to that of the dynamism of overall societies, and whether increasing mobility makes societies more dynamic in all their aspects. In answering these questions several focal points should be envisaged: does the pattern of stratification change over time and how; do the yardsticks by which individuals are located change over time and how; do the patterns and yardsticks permit greater or lesser mobility and how are these opportunities used? 1 5 An international collection of studies on stratification as class inequality in societies is found in Cahiers Intemationaux de Sociologie, 1965, Vols. 38 and 39. 16 See Reinhard Bendix and Seymour Martin Lipset (eds.) Class, Status and Power, A Reader in Social Stratification (Glencoe, 1953). 1 3 8 EXPLAINING DYNAMICS BY FOCUSING ON SUB-PROCESSES 1. Stratification and articulation Before answering these question, it is necessary to move a step back-wards. Is stratification as a concept really applicable to all societies? Stratification is a method by which (macro-)society is articulated vertically into groups or categories of higher and lower strata or ranks. Are some societies articulated differently, or not at all? Soviet society, for example, presents itself officially as egalitarian, but not, however, as non-articulated. The bulk of Soviet society is considered to be constituted by the workers on the road towards the ideal communist state. These workers have their avant garde, the communist party. The party has its pioneers who discover and indicate the road, the general line, to be followed by the party and the workers. Soviet society also recognizes its rearguard, the reactionists. This is an image, a picture, by which this society is presented to itself as horizontally and dynamically articulated.
eBook - PDF- Diana Kendall(Author)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Cengage Learning EMEA(Publisher)
Stratification systems include slav- ery, caste, and class. Slavery, an extreme form of stratifica- tion in which people are owned or controlled by others, is a closed system. The caste system is also a closed one in which people’s status is determined at birth based on their parents’ position in society. The class system, which exists in the United States, is a type of stratification based on ownership of resources and on the type of work that people do. LO2 How did Karl Marx view social class? Marx viewed social class as a key determinant of social inequality and social change. For Marx, class position and the extent of our income and wealth are determined by our work situation or our relationship to the means of production. Marx stated that capitalistic societies consist of two classes—the capitalists and the workers—and class relationships involve inequality and exploitation. LO3 What is Max Weber’s analysis of social class? Weber emphasized that no single factor (such as economic divisions between capitalists and workers) was sufficient for defining the location of categories of people within the class structure. Weber developed a multidimensional concept of stratification that focuses on the interplay of wealth, pres- tige, and power. LO4 What are the contemporary sociological models of class structure in the United States? In contemporary times, no broad consensus exists about how to characterize the class structure in this country. Sociologists have developed two models of the class struc- ture: One is based on a Weberian approach, the other on a Marxian approach. In the Weberian-based approach, social classes are based on three elements: education, occupation of family head, and family income. This approach to class structure consists of the upper class, the upper-middle class, the middle class, the working class, the working poor, and the underclass.
eBook - PDFSocial Mobility and Education in Britain
Research, Politics and Policy
- Erzsébet Bukodi, John H. Goldthorpe(Authors)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
1 | Social Class as the Context of Social Mobility Social mobility is the movement of individuals over time between different social positions. Insofar as positions are taken to be in some way more or less advantaged, mobility can be characterised as being upward or downward in direction: that is, as being from a less to a more advantaged position or vice versa. To this extent, the understand- ing of social mobility in the social sciences is on much the same lines as it is in everyday life. However, where questions arise concerning actual rates, patterns and trends of mobility, and the systematic collection and analysis of relevant data have to be undertaken, it is necessary for social scientists to think about mobility in ways that are conceptually more explicit and precise than those that serve for less demanding purposes. First and foremost, it is essential that the context of mobility – that is, the positions between which mobility is seen as occurring – should be clearly specified. Within the social sciences there are in fact signifi- cant differences in this regard. Sociologists, who, as indicated in the Introduction, have thus far carried out the greater part of research into social mobility, tend to focus on mobility between social strata, as characterised, for example, in terms of social class. In contrast, econo- mists, among whom a sustained interest in social mobility is, at least in Britain, a relatively recent development, focus on mobility in terms of income – that is, on the mobility of individuals between different levels within the overall income distribution. In this book we will, as sociologists, be concerned primarily with social class mobility: that is, with mobility between different class positions.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
