Introduction to Sociology - SOC101 Handouts (Virtual University of Pakistan) PDF

Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY (SOC101) VIRTUAL UNIVERSITY OF PAKISTAN ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan...

Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY (SOC101) VIRTUAL UNIVERSITY OF PAKISTAN ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 1  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Lesson-01 THE ORIGIN OF SOCIOLOGY Lesson Overview Meaning of sociology Scientific thinking vs tradition August Comte Herbert Spencer Karl Marx Emile Durkheim Topic-001: Meaning of Sociology Sociology is the systematic and scientific study of human behavior, social groups, and society. Sociologists study structural and institutional forces that shape our everyday lives, behaviors, and social values and delve into how we help create those social structures and institutions. Sociology is an academic discipline, but this does not mean that it is simply “a thing to be studied... sociology is, first of all, a thing lived” (Lemert, 2008: xv). Perhaps sociologist Peter Berger (1963:4) rightly said when he wrote, “Sociology is not a practice but an attempt to understand.” This requires that sociologists deal with everyday events a little differently from the way most people do (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Sociology provides us with the tools to analyze and interpret social phenomena. Sociology can be used to address social issues and promote social change. It is a broad and diverse field that covers a range of topics and approaches. Sociology is relevant to our everyday lives and the world we live in. Topic-002: Scientific Thinking vs Tradition The scientific revolution in the 17th century paved the way for a new approach to understanding the world. The scientific method emphasized empirical evidence and systematic observation. This approach challenged traditional beliefs and authority. It led to the development of new fields of study, including sociology. Sociology emerged as a response to the social changes and challenges of the modern era. It sought to apply the scientific method to the study of social phenomena. Sociology aimed to provide a rational and systematic understanding of society and human behavior.It challenged traditional ways of thinking and offered new insights into the social world. Some Major Sociologists Topic003: Positivism August Comte (1798-1857) According to Blumberg (1974) August Comte was born into an aristocratic Catholic family in France; he studied science and for many years was the private secretary and collaborator of Claude Henri de Saint-Simon (1760–1825), who emphasized an observation based, positivist social scientific method. Comte elaborated a “Positive Philosophy” for the study of humanity, and won renown for coining the term “sociology,” a word designed to capture his belief that a social physics, a science that would emulate the natural sciences, could discover laws explaining society (Dillon 2014). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 2  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Focus on Objectivity In Comte’s view, sociology would focus only on observable data, and approach its subject matter with the same objectivity and impartiality, and the same systematic attention to processes and causes, that physical scientists use; what, for example, biologists do in studying plants. We don’t expect the biologist’s empirical observations of plant life to be impacted by his or her values or social background; and so too, Comte believed that social life could be similarly studied (Dillon 2014). Positivism Applying the scientific method to the social world, a process known as positivism, apparently was first proposed by Auguste Comte. Reflecting on the upheavals of the French Revolution and on the changes, he experienced when he moved to Paris from the small town in which he had grown up, Comte became interested in what holds society together. He began to ask what creates social order, instead of anarchy or chaos. And once society does become set on a particular course, what causes it to change, he wondered. Comte decided that the scientific method was the key to answering such questions. Just as the scientific method had revealed the law of gravity, so, too, it would uncover the laws that underlie society. Comte called this new science sociology— “the study of society” (from the Greek logos, “study of,” and the Latin socius, “companion,” or “being with others”). The purpose of this new science, he said, would be not only to discover social principles but also to apply them to social reform. Comte developed a grandiose view: Sociologists would reform the entire society, making it a better place to live (Henslin 2010). Law of three Stages Comte viewed sociology as the product of a three-stage historical development. During the earliest, the theological stage, from the beginning of human history to the end of the European Middle Ages about 1350 C.E., people took a religious view that God’s will is expressed through society. With the rise of the Renaissance in the fifteenth century, the theological approach gave way to a metaphysical stage of history in which people perceived society as a natural rather than a supernatural system. What Comte called the scientific stage of history began with the work of early scientists such as the Polish astronomer Copernicus (1473 1543), the Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo (1564–1642), and the English physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton (1642–1727). Comte’s contribution came in applying the scientific approach to the study of society which was first used to study the physical world. (Macionis 2012). Topic-004: Social Darwinism Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) Spencer was born on 27 April 1820 in England. He is popularly known as the British Aristotle and often called the second founding father of sociology. The succeeding writers were highly influenced from his thoughts. The name of spencer cannot be separated from the birth of sociology in England. He can be thought in terms of original and independent thinker. His contributions in the fields of knowledge like philosophy, biology, psychology, anthropology, and sociology are manyfold. Following are some of the important books written by Herbert Spencer. 1. Social Statics (1850) ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 3  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU 2. First Principles (1862). 3. The study of Sociology (1873) 4. The Principles of Sociology in three volumes (1876-96) 5. The Man verses the State (1884) Spencer’s evolutionary theory and Sociology Societies go through a natural evolution, he said, evolving from lower (“barbarian”) to higher (“civilized”) forms. This natural process improves societies. As generations pass, the most capable and intelligent (“the fittest”) members of a society survive, while the less capable die out. The fittest members will produce a more advanced society—unless misguided do- gooders get in the way and help the less fit (the lower classes) survive. Spencer called this principle the survival of the fittest. Although Spencer coined this phrase, it usually is attributed to his contemporary, Charles Darwin, who proposed that organisms evolve over time as they adapt to their environment (Henslin 2010). Spencer and social Darwinism: Where Darwin refers to the evolution of organisms, Spencer refers to the evolution of societies. Because Darwin is better known, Spencer’s idea is called social Darwinism. (If fame had gone the other way, we might be speaking of “biological Spencerism.”). Spencer’s idea that it was wrong to help the poor offended many. Many wealthy businessmen of the time, however, liked the concept of the survival of the fittest: They saw themselves as “the fittest”—and therefore superior. I’m sure that Spencer’s views also helped some of them avoid feeling guilty for living like royalty while people around them went hungry (Henslin 2010). Ethics and Politics According to Spencer, moral law was derived from individuals, yet, good and evil are determined by God. Evil resulted from non adaptation to external conditions which would diminish in a society which is [perfectly evolved. We can characterize Spencerian politics as libertarian because he was against state intervention in daily life matters especially economic matters. He also disapproved state centered charity, education, and other services such as garbage removal. Private philanthropy was also rejected by him because he was the advocate of survival of the fittest. According to him, charity, whether from state or private hands facilitated unhealthy and nonproductive members in society. Topic-005: Origin of Sociology: Capitalism Karl Marx (1818-1883) He was a German political philosopher and economist born in 1818 in Prussia. The year 1848 was the “Year of Revolutions” in Europe, as workers and ordinary people revolted against the ruling monarchies in Germany, Italy, Austria, Hungary, and France. Marx himself had participated in the German revolutionary movement, and that same year he and Friedrich Engels published their famous treatise The Communist Manifesto. Marx was expelled from Germany and subsequently too from France because of his revolutionary views. He died in 1883 (Dillon 2014). Wage labor ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 4  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Wage-workers think they are free; they may think of themselves as just trying to make a decent living, but in essence, as we recall, their Labor power is a commodity bought and sold on the market for others’ profit accumulation (Dillon 2014). Alienation The division of labor may seem necessary to distributing responsibility and expertise for the many complex jobs that need to be done in society and ensuring that labor is used efficiently to produce the vast number of commodities that are needed to meet consumer demand. But Marx wants us to see it differently – to see it as dehumanizing of the individual and of society. Marx argues that the commodification of labor power such that workers are reduced to commodities (with exchange- and use-value) produces alienation, or alienated labor. Alienated labor is the result of the economic and social organization of capitalism, of capitalism’s production objectives (e.g., profit) and processes such as the division of labor (Dillon 2014). Capitalism as Structured Inequality Capitalism is a mode of production based on unequal private ownership of the means of production (in contrast, for example, to state ownership in socialist societies, e.g., North Korea). Under capitalism, a minority of capitalists, the bourgeoisie, who own and monopolize the means of production, i.e., property – land, oil wells, railroads, factories, corporations – accumulate profit based on the labor of employees – the wage-workers, the proletariat, who must work hard to meet production demands in factories, farms, mines, corporate offices, and hotels and who through their work convert raw materials into commodities (including services and information) that are sold by the capitalists for profit. In turn, capitalists use this profit to expand their ownership of private property while the property-less workers – like hotel housekeepers continue to toil for minimal wages, thus maintaining, as Marx argued, the ever-growing economic and social gap between capitalists and workers (Dillon 2014). Dialectical Materialism Marx believes that history does not progress smoothly. Each historical-economic epoch (e.g., slave society, feudalism, capitalism) is featured as tensions or contradictions. Change emerges only when these contradictions, and the social forces and relations which reproduce these contradictions, are exposed, and ruptured through social revolution – “revolution is the driving force of history”. Marx’s view of history emphasizes that the human-created economic conditions in place at a given historical moment give rise to particular economic and social practices. These practices motivate particular groups to challenge the unequal conditions of their existence, and this opens the way for the emergence of new material (economic) conditions and social relations. This historical process, for Marx, is dialectical materialism. The word “dialectic” derives from the Greek word dialegein, meaning “to argue,” and was used by philosophers from Plato down to Hegel to draw out the contradictions in the logic used in intellectual ideas. This method typically follows not a linear but a pendulum-like thesis–antithesis–synthesis form. Marx – given his focus on what he considered real history, i.e., the history not of ideas but of “the production of material life itself” (Dillon 2014). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 5  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Marx vision of communism: In Marx’s evolutionary view, communism is the type of society that would emerge following the overthrow of capitalism. It would be a society features as the abolition of private property, profit, the division of labor, and social classes. The logic of material production in communist society would require each person to contribute their labor to the everyday material and social good of the community on the basis of their diverse and multifaceted abilities (to build cabins, grow tomatoes, cook, sew, sing). In a communist society – i.e., a society in which private property, profit, and inequality would be eliminated and thus no one class (e.g., slave-owners, feudal lords, capitalists) would control the means of production (slaves, land, capital) – there would be no more tensions and contradictions to resolve. Hence the dialectic of history (dialectical materialism) would come to a stop. Marx’s vision of communism, therefore, would entail the emancipation not only of the working class, but of all people; it would represent “universal human emancipation” (Dillon 2014). Topic-006: Empiricism Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) Emile Durkheim was born in April 1858 into a middle-class orthodox Jewish family in France. Living through a period of social, economic, and political upheaval, unsurprisingly, like Marx, the center of his focus was social change and industrial society. But unlike Marx, who focused on the structural contradictions in capitalism (e.g., class inequality), the question of social order preoccupied Durkheim. Like Saint-Simon, Comte, and Rousseau, he was interested to unearth how social order can be achieved and maintained while social progress is ongoing (Bellah 1973: xviii). Social Structures Durkheim conceptualized society as a complex system whose component parts or structures (e.g., economic activity, law, science, family structure, religion, etc.) are all interrelated but whose independent functioning allows smooth functioning of whole society. because of this, his sociology is often called functionalism or structural functionalism (Dillon 2014). Scientific Sociology: The Study of Social Facts Durkheim has a long-lasting impact on the everyday practice of sociology. This is particularly true of American sociology. Although many sociologists today might not acknowledge any debt to Durkheim, the dominant way sociologists go about studying the world owes much to his methodological approach. He outlined a scientific sociological methodology in The Rules of Sociological Method, first published in 1895, and in a pioneering study of suicide rates in nineteenth-century Europe (published in Suicide, 1897) demonstrated the scientific method that has inspired what sociologists do in carrying out quantitative research. This includes the definition and measurement of social variables and the statistical study of the relations between independent and dependent variables. Durkheim gave the concept of social facts, which refers to all those external and collective ways in which society shapes, structures, and constrains behavior of its members. According to Durkheim, “the first and most basic rule is to consider social facts as things” – as things that objectively exist in society, and which can objectively be studies. social facts as things that objectively exist outside of us and which can be objectively measured using various indicators, we can study social phenomena irrespective of our own views of, or feelings toward, the phenomenon. Consider religion. Religion concerns a lot of unknowns. Does God exist? Does God answer prayers? Is there an afterlife? These are questions that no researcher, and not even the most devout faith believer, can verify ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 6  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU empirically. However, many sociologists, following Durkheim, study religion as a social fact, as an objective thing in society – using indicators of its thingness, such as how often individuals attend church. These sociologists then investigate how frequency of church attendance constrains and is constrained by other forms of social behavior, such as volunteering in the community, alcohol consumption, voting. Social facts should not be equated with “statistical facts,” such as the percentages of girls and boys who go to college, or the divorce or birth rates, though all these facts too are social facts because they shape social behavior: they structure social policies, cultural expectations, and individuals’ decisions about various things. But social facts encompass much more than statistical facts; they include all the ways in which social structures and social norms and collective expectations constrain social behavior (Dillon 2014). Nature of Society For Durkheim, society is not simply a collection of individuals but is a collectivity with own characteristics and features. Society is beyond the sum of the individuals that comprise it; it includes social relationships (e.g., family, friends, community), social patterns (e.g., demographic trends), and forms of social organization (e.g., occupational divisions, bureaucracy, marriage, church), and these collective forces independently regulate individual and group behavior. Although marriage, for instance, is contracted by two individuals, marriage as a social fact predates and outlives the lifetime of any couple, and the propensity of individuals to marry is itself constrained not alone by romantic attraction (itself a social fact), but by many other social facts including, for example, the state of the economy, church expectations and prohibitions, divorce legislation, and cultural expectations (e.g., of age of marriage/cohabitation, etc.). Thus, Durkheim argues, society has its own reality, what he calls a sui generis reality, that is, a collective reality that exerts its own force independent of individuals. Society, therefore, through its various social structures and everyday customs and norms, constrains how we think, feel, and act. These external constraints exist outside of the self; they have an independent existence in society and cannot be willed out of existence by the individual (Dillon 2014). Data centered Sociology/Empirical Sociology Durkheim asserts that to treat phenomena as things is to treat them as data and this constitute the starting point for science. In this scientific process, the whole of social reality is open to empirical investigation, wherein “the conventional character of a practice or an institution should never be assumed in advance”. Therefore, although we study things that may seem obvious or that we think we already know, such as friendship, crime, families, by studying these social phenomena scientifically – using data and making inferences based on data – we will likely discover or clarify characteristics about the phenomenon. He demonstrated this by carrying out an empirical study, Suicide (1897), where he addressed suicide rates in 19th century Europe. Using suicide as the dependent (outcome) variable, he examines how social integration or regulation varies by several independent (predictor) variables to increase the likelihood of suicide (Dillon 2014). Suicide: A Social Fact Although suicide is an individual act, it is also a social phenomenon. And although we might think of suicide as a “social problem,” it is “normal” in the Durkheimian sense because every ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 7  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU society has a certain level of suicide. Already in the early nineteenth century, Harriet Martineau had defined suicide as “the voluntary surrender of life from any cause” and as Durkheim would too, she recognized it as a normal social fact, and one indicative of varying levels of social regulation and integration. From a sociological perspective, therefore, notwithstanding the unique personal circumstances in which individuals commit suicide, suicide can – and should, according to Durkheim – be studied in terms of its antecedent social context, specifically, its relation to social integration. From his analysis of suicide rates in Western Europe, Durkheim concluded that “suicide varies inversely with the degree of integration of the social groups of which the individual forms a part” (Su 209). Social groups and the extent to which those groups are tightly integrated exert a constraining influence on the individual. He distinguished between four types of suicides (Dillon 2014). Altruistic Suicide Dillon (2014) notes that the type of suicide which occurs due to excessive integration of individual with his social group is known as altruistic suicide. In these circumstances of high social integration, individuals are so closely oriented to fulfilling the expectations of the community or group that suicide becomes the obligatory honorable option when they fail to meet those expectations (Su 221). Egoistic Suicide Egoistic as the label suggests, refers to suicide under social conditions in which individuals are excessively self-oriented, and hence only very loosely bound to other individuals and social groups. In modern western society individualism is highly valued; the advanced division of labor associated with industrialization requires, as Durkheim emphasized, individual specialization. The collective conscience does not rein in the individual’s egoistic appetites, and indeed celebrates individual freedom and ambition. It is not so surprising, then, that some individuals become so self-oriented they have fewer outlets and opportunities for social relations (family, friends, community) (Dillon 2014). Anomic Suicide Anomie is a French word meaning the absence of norms or of established standards; it refers to circumstances when the normal patterns of social life are suddenly uprooted. In contemporary times, many people live in communities that are aptly characterized as “places without roots,” places that attract transients, people on the move for various economic and personal reasons, and as such it is difficult for these communities to provide a socially integrating anchor for individuals and families. In these anomic places, we would expect suicide rates to be high (Dillon 2014). Social Solidarity: Organic Solidarity and Mechanical Solidarity Mechanical Solidarity The structural and cultural sameness that characterizes the beliefs and social relationships in traditional societies produces what Durkheim calls mechanical solidarity; the creation and maintenance of social ties are mechanical, i.e., they are built into the very structure of the community. When people in a community have relatively similar occupations, family histories, experiences, and beliefs, and overlapping social relationships, these similarities make it relatively easy to produce social cohesion. Vacherie, Louisiana, the most rooted town ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 8  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU in the most rooted state in America, is a good illustration of the mechanical solidarity that Durkheim attributes to traditional communities. Its tightly bounded and overlapping family and neighborhood relationships, the force of its collective expectations on social habits (e.g., Sunday dinner with the extended family), and long-established shared occupational histories and leisure routines ensure a mechanical maintenance of the community’s social ties, order, and cohesion (Dillon 2014). Organic Solidarity The interdependence that is required by and results from the highly specialized division of labor leads to, what Durkheim calls, organic solidarity. “This solidarity is like that observed in the higher animals. In fact, each organ has its own special characteristics and autonomy, yet the greater the unity of the organism, the more marked the individualization of the components. employing this analogy, we propose to call ‘organic’ the solidarity that results from the division of labor” (Dillon 2014). Collective Conscience This term (translated form the French conscience collective) is used by Durkheim to refer to a societies or community’s collectively shared feelings, values, and ideals. the collective conscience exerts a strong authority over the whole community, maintaining social order and cohesiveness by tightly regulating the expectations and behavior of individuals. In Vacherie, Louisiana, for example, it would be hard for a woman to defy the expectation of helping to prepare the extended family’s Sunday dinner. In traditional communities there is little individualism, little personal freedom, and anonymity – the individual, rather, “is absorbed into the collective”. This brings a strong feeling of social belonging, but it also means that the individual has little freedom to stray from the norms and authority of the community. Anyone who has grown up in a small town knows this feeling well; it’s hard to escape your neighbor’s watchful eyes, and particularly as you move through your teenage years looking for excitement, you might find the community’s “social horizon” too limiting, too constraining and overpowering of your individual desires (Dillon 2014). Religion and Science Durkheim recognized that with the rise of modern society, particularly, the increase in individualism (required by the specialized division of labor) and the expansion of science as the basis of knowledge – the dogmatic hold of traditional religious systems would vanish. However, Durkheim also believed that scientific knowledge alone does not suffice to connect people together. He did not see science and religion in contradiction with one another, but as having functions which are interlinked. Science offers knowledge, but religion (and its functional equivalents such as baseball, soccer, etc.) provides action – the “moral remaking,” the social bonding, that revolve around its rituals. thus, “religion cannot be replaced by science. For if science expresses life, it does not create it”. It does not revitalize social bonds. Thus, Durkheim argued, religion would maintain itself as an eternal social fact; it would adapt and transform rather than wane. As we see today, although traditional religion is a vital source of social integration in many societies (and especially in the US), there are also many other sacred things (e.g., sports events, knitting groups, book clubs) that draw people together and invigorate social cohesion and solidarity (Dillon 2014). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 9  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Lesson-02 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE Lesson Overview Sociological Imagination Thinking like a Sociologist: Key Questions Sociology and common sense Perspectivising human behavior Understanding causality Sociological Themes and Topics Sociological Perspective Sociology provides a fascinating view of social life. The sociological perspective (or imagination) opens a window onto strange worlds—and offers a fresh look at familiar ones. The sociological perspective gives importance to the social contexts in which people live. It investigates how these contexts impacts people’s lives. At the heart of the sociological perspective is the question of how groups influence people, especially how people are influenced by their society—a group of people who share a culture and a territory. To find out why people do what they do, sociologists look at social location, the corners in life that people occupy because of where they are in a society. Sociologists look at how jobs, income, education, gender, race–ethnicity, and age affect people’s ideas and behaviour. Consider, for example, how being identified with a group called females or with a group called males when you were growing up has shaped your ideas of who you are growing up as a female or a male has influenced not only how you feel about yourself but also your ideas of what you should attain in life and how you relate to others. Sociologist C. Wright Mills (1959) put it this way: “The sociological imagination enables us to grasp the connection between history and biography.” By history, Mills meant that each society is in a broad stream of events. This gives each society specific characteristics—such as its ideas about the proper roles of men and women. By biography, Mills referred to our experiences within these historical settings, which give us our orientations to life. In short, people don’t do what they do because they inherited some internal mechanism, such as instincts. Rather, external influences— our experiences—become part of our thinking and motivation. In short, the society in which we grow up, and our location in that society, lie at the centre of what we do and how we think. (Henslin 2011). The Global Context and the Local How life has changed! Our predecessors lived on isolated farms and in small towns. They grew their own food and made their own clothing. They bought only sugar, coffee, and a few other items that they couldn’t produce. Beyond the borders of their small communities lay a world they perceived only dimly. The labels on our clothing (from Hong Kong to Italy), in contrast, as well as the many other imported products that have become part of our daily lives shout that our world has shrunk into a global village. Even though we can pick up a telephone or use the Internet to communicate instantly with people anywhere on the planet, we continue to occupy our own little corners of life. Like those of our predecessors, our worlds, too, are marked by differences in family background, religion, gender, race–ethnicity, and social class. In these corners, we continue to learn distinctive ways of viewing the world. One of the ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 10  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU beautiful—and fascinating—aspects of sociology is that it enables us to look at both parts of our current reality: being part of a global network and our unique experiences in our smaller corners of life. This text reflects both worlds, each so vital in understanding who we are (Henslin 2011). Social Problems What motivates sociologists to investigate social phenomena? Why do they study obesity as a social phenomenon, for example? An important reason for sociologists to study certain topics is when these are considered social problems. But what are social problems? A social problem, also named public issue, is commonly understood as a problem that (Mills, 2000): 1. Goes beyond the individual (it affects many people) 2. Is an issue about which many people are concerned (it is in conflict with certain values). Social problems are more severe the more people are affected (criterion 1) and the more strongly they conflict with prevalent values (criterion 2). Topic-007: Sociological Imagination (C Wright Mills) By using our sociological imaginations, we can better see the relationship between ourselves and the society in which we live. Sociologist C. Wright Mills (1959) contended that this requires that we grasp the connection between history (events that have shaped an entire society’s values and beliefs) and biography (an individual’s life experiences within a particular society). This important link is often overlooked, but it is essential for sociological understanding, because it places individual behavior in a larger social context. It reminds us that we, as individuals, are to some extent products of the particular society and historical period in which we live, but also acknowledges that we are history makers who help produce and change society by our actions (Thompson and Hickey 2016). Personal Troubles versus Social Issues: A sociological imagination allows us to see the important relationship between personal troubles, which affect an individual (e.g., being an alcoholic), and social issues, which reflect a problem for the entire society (e.g., alcoholism) (Mills, 1959). This distinction is a critical component of sociology because it enables us to see the general in the particular (Berger, 1963). Sociologists study patterns of behavior to draw general conclusions about a social issue that transcend the effect of the problem or issue on any individual. For example, although alcoholism may have devastating consequences for the alcoholic and his or her immediate family, sociology focuses on the larger problem of alcoholism and its impact on society. This broader sociological focus may include cross- cultural values and attitudes toward alcohol consumption, alcohol use and abuse on college campuses, drinking and driving, the differences and similarities between alcoholism and other forms of drug abuse, and other sociological issues. This is not to say that sociologists are unconcerned about individuals and their lives, but sociology’s emphasis is on the way individuals relate to others, peoples’ positions in society, and the interdependence between society and individuals (Thompson and Hickey 2016). Topic-008: Thinking like a Sociologist: Key Questions What are the social structures and institutions that shape human behavior? ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 11  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU How do social norms, values, and beliefs influence human actions and interactions? How does power and inequality operate in society? What are the causes and consequences of social problems? How do individuals and groups create and maintain social order? What are the implications of social change and social movements for society and individuals? How can we use sociological knowledge to promote social justice and social change? Example from Pakistani society: Examining the role of religion and caste in shaping social stratification and inequality. Topic-009: Sociology and Common Sense Isn’t sociology just common sense? It could be a friend who raises this question with you, a family member or someone else to whom you talked about sociology. Sociology is a relatively young discipline compared with other sciences such as physics and biology, starting off in real spirit roughly around the year 1900. In slightly more than 100 years it has witnessed an enormous growth of scientific observations and explanations and has become a respected social science with clear societal relevance. However, sometimes people are not aware of the progress that has been made in sociology and think that sociological work is no different from common sense and conventional wisdom. Why are people sometimes thinking this way? In his book Why Everything is Obvious—Once You Know the Facts, the sociologist Duncan Watts argues that common sense helps us with practical issues that we encounter daily (Watts, 2011). For example: how should we behave when talking to people, how do we navigate through the traffic to our work and how to keep relationships going on well. We use common sense often implicitly, intuitively and it helps to solve all kinds of small things. However, he also makes clear that such common-sense thinking is often utterly wrong when it comes to understanding social phenomena. What is worse, people often think that only other people are subject to the failure of common sense, whereas everyone happens to be prone to failures of common-sense thinking. Watts, who trained as a mathematician and physicist before he turned to sociology, makes the interesting observation that few people nowadays would dare to apply common-sense thinking regarding physics—which often shows counter-intuitive findings— whereas many people still do so when it comes to social phenomena. It is easy to come up with explanations for human behavior, as we are human beings, rather than to imagine oneself being an electron, for example, and explain the way electrons behave. Watts argues that people have too much confidence in their common sense when it comes to understanding such social behavior. Sociological knowledge often challenges common sense, i.e., people’s descriptions of reality and their explanations. Indeed, an important role for sociologists is to debunk myths and uncover social patterns that are sometimes surprising and counter intuitive. All of us, as human beings, are private sociologists, because we engage in social life and develop our own, private, beliefs about social phenomena, about what’s happening and why. For many daily situations, our common-sense thinking is sufficiently accurate, however there is a major gap between this common-sense thinking of private sociologists on the one hand and academic sociology on the other hand. One difference is that, in academic sociology, knowledge ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 12  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU becomes available to others, it becomes public, “objective,” and hence the subject of critique and systematic inquiries by many people. Topic-010: Perspectivising Human Behavior Understanding that human behavior is shaped by multiple factors, including social, cultural, and psychological influences Recognizing the importance of individual agency and free will in shaping behavior Examining the interplay between individual and societal factors in shaping behavior Appreciating the diversity and complexity of human experience and behavior Recognizing the influence of power and inequality on individual and group behavior Using different theoretical perspectives to analyze human behavior, such as functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism Applying sociological concepts and theories to real-life situations and issues Example from Pakistani society: Analyzing the impact of honor culture on individual behavior and social relationships. Topic-011: Understanding Causality Recognizing the complexity of causal relationships in social phenomena Avoiding simplistic and reductionist explanations of social phenomena Using systematic research methods to establish causal relationships Understanding the difference between correlation and causation Considering alternative explanations and potential confounding factors in establishing causal relationships Being mindful of the ethical implications of causal research and interventions Using causal knowledge to inform policy and practice Example from Pakistani society: Investigating the causes of child labor and developing effective interventions to address the issue. We need three things to establish causality: temporal order, empirical association, and the elimination of plausible alternatives. An implicit fourth condition is that the causal relationship makes sense or fits with broader assumptions or a theoretical framework. Let us examine the three basic conditions. In addition to these three, a full explanation also requires specifying the causal mechanism and outlining a causal chain. 1. Temporal order means that the cause must come earlier in time than an effect. This common-sense assumption establishes the direction of causality: from the cause toward the effect. You may ask how the cause can come after what it is to affect. It cannot, but temporal order is only one of the conditions needed for causality. Temporal order is necessary but not sufficient to infer causality. 2. An association means that two phenomena occur together in a patterned way or appear to act together. People often confuse the word correlation with association. Correlation has a specific technical meaning and there are certain statistical requirements for it. Association is the more general idea. ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 13  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU 3. Eliminating alternatives means that we must show that the effect is due to the causal variable, not to something else. It is also called no spuriousness because an apparent causal relationship that is due to an alternative but unrecognized cause is called a spurious relationship. While we can observe temporal order and associations, we cannot empirically eliminate all logical alternatives. Eliminating possible alternatives is an ideal. This means we can demonstrate this only indirectly or rule out the more obvious alternative explanations. 4. Specifying the mechanism in a causal relationship means that when we create a causal explanation, we must have more than two variables that are correlated, which is “a satisfactory explanation requires that we also specify the social ‘cogs and wheels. We go beyond saying that an independent and dependent variable are linked, as if the connection were through a “black box” of unknown processes. A full causal explanation identifies a causal relationship and specifies a causal mechanism (Neuman 2014). Topic-012: Sociological Themes and Topics Social stratification and inequality Race, ethnicity, and discrimination Gender and sexuality Family and kinship Education and socialization Religion and spirituality Globalization and transnationalism Health, illness, and medicine ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 14  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Lesson-03 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES IN SOCIOLOGY Lesson Overview Levels of analysis (Micro, Meso, Macro) Structural functionalism Conflict Symbolic Interactionism Contemporary Theoretical Approaches (Feminism, Post Colonialism, Post Modernism) Facts never interpret themselves. To make sense out of life, we place our experiences (our “facts”) into a framework of more-or-less related ideas. This gives us a way of interpreting them. Sociologists do this, too, but they place their observations into a conceptual framework called a theory. A theory is a general statement about how some parts of the world fit together and how they work. It is an explanation of how two or more “facts” are related to one another. Sociologists use three major theories: symbolic interactionism, functional analysis, and conflict theory. Each theory is like a lens through which we can view social life (Henslin 2011). Topic-013: Levels of Analysis: Micro, Macro, Meso Micro level analysis refers to the individual level of analysis and focuses on individual actions, behaviors and attitudes. Macro level analysis refers to the society level of analysis and focuses on large scale social structures and institutions. Meso level analysis refers to the intermediate level of analysis and focuses on groups and organizations. In Pakistani society, micro level analysis could include studying the impact of individual beliefs and attitudes on gender roles, macro level analysis could include studying the impact of political structures on the distribution of power, and meso level analysis could include studying the impact of cultural organizations on local communities. A major difference among these three theoretical perspectives is their level of analysis. Functionalists and conflict theorists focus on the macro level; that is, they examine large- scale patterns of society. In contrast, symbolic internationalists usually focus on the micro level, on social interaction—what people do when they are in one anther's presence. To make this distinction clear an example can be given. For instance, to study homeless people, symbolic internationalists would focus on the micro level. They would analyse what homeless people do when they are in shelters and on the streets. They would also analyse their communications, both their talk and their nonverbal interaction (gestures, use of space, and so on). This micro level, however, would not interest functionalists and conflict theorists. They would focus instead on the macro level; how changes in some parts of society increase homelessness. Functionalists might look at how jobs have dried up—that there is less need for unskilled Labor and how millions of jobs have been transferred to workers overseas. Or they might focus on changes in the family—how because of divorce and smaller families many people who can’t find work don’t have others ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 15  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU to fall back on. For their part, conflict theorists would stress the struggle between social classes. They would be interested in how the decisions of international elites affect not only global production and trade but also the local job market, unemployment, and homelessness. Topic-014: Structural Functionalism The central idea of functional analysis is that society is a whole unit, made up of interrelated parts that work together. Functional analysis (also known as functionalism and structural functionalism) is rooted in the origins of sociology. August Comte and Herbert Spencer viewed society as a kind of living organism. Just as a person or animal has organs that function together, they wrote, so does society. And like an organism, if society is to function smoothly, its parts must work together in harmony. Emile Durkheim also viewed society as being composed of many parts, each with its own function. When all the parts of society fulfill their functions, society is in a “normal” state. If they do not fulfill their functions, society is in an “abnormal” or “pathological” state. To understand society, then, functionalists say that we need to look at both structure (how the parts of a society fit together to make the whole) and function (what each part does, how it contributes to society) (Henslin 2011). Robert Merton and Functionalism: Robert Merton (1910–2003) dismissed the organic analogy, but he did maintain the essence of functionalism—the image of society being composed of parts that work together. Merton used the term functions to refer to the beneficial consequences of people’s actions: Functions help keep a group (society, social system) in balance. In contrast, dysfunctions are the harmful consequences of people’s actions. They undermine a system’s equilibrium. Functions can be either manifest or latent. If an action is intended to help some part of a system, it is a manifest function. For example, suppose that government officials become concerned that women are having so few children. Congress offers a $10,000 bonus for every child born to a married couple. The intention, or manifest function, of the bonus is to increase childbearing within the family unit. Merton pointed out that people’s actions can also have latent functions; that is, they can have unintended consequences that help a system adjust. Let’s suppose that the bonus works. As the birth rate jumps, so does the sale of diapers and baby furniture. Because the benefits to these businesses were not the intended consequences, they are latent functions of the bonus. Of course, human actions can also hurt a system. Because such consequences usually are unintended, Merton called them latent dysfunctions. Let’s assume that the government has failed to specify a “stopping point” regarding its bonus system. To collect more bonuses, some people keep on having children. The more children they have, however, the more they need the next bonus to survive. Large families become common, and poverty increases. Welfare is reinstated, taxes jump, and the nation erupts in protest. Because these results were not intended and because they harmed the social system, they would be latent dysfunctions of the bonus program. In Sum: From the perspective of functional analysis, society is a functioning unit, with each part related to the whole. Whenever we examine a smaller part, we need to look for its functions and dysfunctions to see how it is related to the larger unit. This basic approach can be applied to any social group, whether an entire society, a college, or even a group as small as a family (Henslin 2011). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 16  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Topic-015: Conflict Theory Conflict theory provides a third perspective on social life. Unlike the functionalists, who view society as a harmonious whole with its parts working together, conflict theorists stress that society is composed of groups that are competing with one another for scarce resources. The surface might show cooperation but scratch that surface and you will find a struggle for power. Karl Marx and Conflict Theory Karl Marx, the founder of conflict theory, witnessed the Industrial Revolution that transformed Europe. He saw that peasants who had left the land to work in cities earned barely enough to eat. Things were so bad that the average worker died at age 30, the average wealthy person at age 50 (Edgerton 1992:87). Shocked by this suffering and exploitation, Marx began to analyses society and history. As he did so, he developed conflict theory. He concluded that the key to human history is class conflict. In each society, some small group controls the means of production and exploits those who are not in control. In industrialized societies, the struggle is between the bourgeoisie, the small group of capitalists who own the means to produce wealth, and the proletariat, the mass of workers who are exploited by the bourgeoisie. The capitalists control the legal and political system: If the workers rebel, the capitalists call on the power of the state to subdue them. When Marx made his observations, capitalism was in its infancy and workers were at the mercy of their employers. Workers had none of what we take for granted today— minimum wages, eight-hour days, coffee breaks, five-day work weeks, paid vacations and holidays, medical benefits, sick leave, unemployment compensation, Social Security, and, for union workers, the right to strike. Marx’s analysis reminds us that these benefits came not from generous hearts, but by workers forcing concessions from their employers. Conflict Theory Today Many sociologists extend conflict theory beyond the relationship of capitalists and workers. They examine how opposing interests run through every layer of society—whether that be a small group, an organization, a community, or the entire society. For example, when police, teachers, and parents try to enforce conformity, this creates resentment and resistance. It is the same when a teenager tries to “change the rules” to gain more independence. Throughout society, then, there is a constant struggle to determine who has authority or influence and how far that dominance goes (Turner 1978; Piven 2008; Manza and McCarthy 2011). Sociologist Lewis Coser (1913–2003) pointed out that conflict is most likely to develop among people who are in close relationships. These people have worked out ways to distribute power and privilege, responsibilities, and rewards. Any change in this arrangement can lead to hurt feelings, resentment, and conflict. Even in intimate relationships, people are in a constant balancing act, with conflict lying uneasily just beneath the surface. Feminists and Conflict Theory: Just as Marx examined conflict between capitalists and workers, many feminists analyze conflict between men and women. Their primary focus is the historical, contemporary, and global inequalities of men and women—and how the traditional dominance by men can be overcome to bring about equality of the sexes. Feminists are not united by the conflict perspective, however. They tackle a variety of topics and use whatever theory applies (Henslin 2011). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 17  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Topic-016: Symbolic Interactionism The central idea of symbolic interactionism is that symbols—things to which we attach meaning—are the key to understanding how we view the world and communicate with one another. Two major sociologists who developed this perspective are George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) and Charles Horton Cooley (1864–1929). Let’s look at the main elements of this theory. Symbols in Everyday Life: Without symbols, our social life would be no more sophisticated than that of animals. For example, without symbols we would have no aunts or uncles, employers, or teachers—or even brothers and sisters. I know that this sounds strange, but it is symbols that define our relationships. There would still be reproduction, of course, but no symbols to tell us how we are related to whom. We would not know to whom we owe respect and obligations, or from whom we can expect privileges—two elements that lie at the essence of human relationships. Not only do relationships depend on symbols, but so does society itself. Without symbols, we could not coordinate our actions with those of others. We could not make plans for a future day, time, and place. Unable to specify times, materials, sizes, or goals, we could not build bridges and highways. Without symbols, we would have no movies or musical instruments, no hospitals, no government, no religion. The class you are taking could not exist—nor could this book. On the positive side, there would be no war (Henslin 2011). Topic-017: Contemporary Theoretical Approaches (Feminism, Post Colonialism, Post Modernism) Feminism is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the importance of gender in shaping social relations and structures. Post colonialism is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the importance of colonialism and its legacy in shaping social relations and structures. Post modernism is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the importance of language and discourse in shaping social relations and structures. In Pakistani society, feminism could be applied to studying the impact of gender on social inequality, post colonialism could be applied to studying the legacy of British colonialism on social structures, and post modernism could be applied to studying the impact of media and language on cultural norms and values. Putting the theoretical perspectives together Which of these theoretical perspectives is the right one? As you have seen, each is a lens that produces a contrasting picture of divorce. The pictures that emerge are quite different from the common-sense understanding that two people are simply “incompatible.” Because each theory focuses on different features of social life, each provides a distinct interpretation. Consequently, we need to use all three theoretical lenses to analyse human behavior. By combining the contributions of each, we gain a more comprehensive picture of social life. (Henslin 2011). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 18  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Lesson 04 SOCIOLOGY AS SCIENCE Lesson Overview What is Science? Theory Building Process: Inductive vs. Deductive Theory Building Process: Concepts and Variables Theory Building Process: Causation vs Correlation Is Sociology a Science? Topic-018: What is Science? Science is based upon verifiable evidence. By evidence we mean factual observations other observers can see, weight, count, and check for accuracy. Scientific observation is not the same as just “looking at things”. We have all been looking at things all our lives, but this does not make us scientific observers any more than a lifetime of swatting flies makes us entomologists. Science constitute observation which differs from ordinary observation in following ways: Scientific Observation is Accurate Scientific observation tries to make sure that things are exactly as described and avoids jumping to conclusions. Novelists may fantasize and politicians may exaggerate, but the scientist must try to be accurate. Scientific Observation is Precise: Precision refers to degree of measurement. Scientific Observation is Systematic: unless observations are collected in an organized, systematic program, they turn out to be spotty and incomplete. Scientific observation is objective means scientific observation is unaffected by the observers’ own beliefs, preference, wishes, or values. In other words, objectivity means to see and accept facts as they are, not as one might wish them to be (Horton and Hunt 2004). The Goals of Science The first goal of each science is to explain why something happens. The second goal is to generalize, that is, to go beyond the individual case and make statements that apply to a broader group or situation. For example, a sociologist wants to explain not only why Mary went to college or became an armed robber but also why people with her characteristics are more likely than others to go to college or to become armed robbers. To achieve generalizations, sociologists look for patterns, recurring characteristics or events. The third scientific goal is to predict, to specify in the light of current knowledge what will happen in the future. To attain these goals, scientists do not rely on magic, superstition, or common beliefs, but, instead, they do systematic research. They explain exactly how they did their research so it can be reviewed by others. Secrecy, prejudice, and other biases go against the grain of science. Sociologists and other scientists also move beyond common sense—the prevailing ideas in a society, the things that “everyone knows” are true. “Everyone” can be misguided today just as everyone was wrong when common sense dictated that the world was flat or that no human could ever walk on the moon. As sociologists do their research, their ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 19  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU findings may confirm or contradict commonsense notions about social life (Horton and Hunt 2004). Sociology as a science: A science may be defined in at least two ways: 1. A science is a body of organized, verified knowledge which has been secured through scientific investigation. 2. A science is a method of study whereby a body of organized, verified knowledge is discovered. These are of course two ways of saying much the same thing. If the first definition is accepted then sociology is a science to the extent that it develops a body of organized, verified knowledge which is based on scientific investigation. To the extent that sociology forsakes myth, folklore and wishful thinking and bases its conclusion on scientific evidence, it is a science. If science is defined as a method of study, chapter then sociology is a science to the extent th at it uses scientific method of study. All natural phenomena can be studied scientifically if one is willing to use scientific methods. Any kind of behavior whether of atoms, animals and adolescents is a proper field for scientific study. During human history few of our actions have been based on verified knowledge, for people through the ages have been guided mainly by folklore, habit, and guess work. Until a few centuries ago very few people accepted the idea that we should find out about the natural world by systematic observation of the natural world itself, rather than by consulting oracles, ancestors, and intuition. This new idea created the modern world. A few decades ago we began acting on the assumption that this same approach might also give useful knowledge about human social life (Horton and Hunt 2004) Topic-019: Theory building process: Inductive vs Deductive Inductive process Inductive logical thought is reasoning that transforms specific observations into general theory. In this mode, a researcher’s thinking runs from the specific to the general and goes something like this: “I have some interesting data here; I wonder what they mean.” Deductive Process A second type of logical thought moves “downward,” in the opposite direction: Deductive logical thought is reasoning that transforms general theory into specific hypotheses suitable for testing. The researcher’s thinking runs from the general to the specific: “I have this hunch about human behavior; let’s collect some data and put it to the test.” Working deductively, the researcher first states the theory in the form of a hypothesis and then selects a method by which to test it. To the extent that the data support the hypothesis, a researcher concludes that the theory is correct; on the other hand, data that refute the hypothesis suggest that the theory needs to be revised or perhaps rejected entirely. Just as researchers often employ several methods over the course of one study, they typically use both kinds of logical thought. Topic-020: Concepts and Variables Concepts are the Building Blocks of Theory. A theoretical concept is an idea we can express as a symbol or in words. We often express theoretical concepts in natural science and mathematics in symbolic forms, such as Greek letters or as formulas (e.g., s= d/t). Let us look ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 20  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU at a simple example concept with which you are already familiar, height. You can say the word height or write it as a symbol, h. The combination of letters in the word or its sound symbolizes, or stands for, an idea in your head. Concepts exist outside of social science theory. They are everywhere, and we use them all the time. Height is a simple concept from everyday life, but what does it mean? We may find it easy to use the concept height but difficult to define or describe the concept itself. This is often the case: We may use concepts but find it difficult to think through their full meaning and give them good definitions. The concept height is an abstract idea about a physical relationship. As a characteristic of a physical object, it indicates the distance from top to bottom. We typically define concepts both by using other concepts and with examples. We can define height by using the concepts of top, bottom, and distance and can illustrate it with numerous examples in the physical world. Concepts have Two Parts A symbol (a word, term, or written character) and a definition. We learn definitions in many ways. We probably learned the word height and the idea it represents, or its definition, from our parents. We learn many concepts as we learn to speak and learn to be socialized to a culture. Our parents probably did not give us a dictionary definition. Instead, they taught us through a diffuse, nonverbal, informal process. They showed us many examples; we observed and listened to others use the word. We used the word incorrectly and got confused looks or someone corrected us. We used it correctly, and others understood us. Eventually, we mastered the concept. This is how we learn most concepts in everyday language. Had our parents isolated us from television and other people and then taught us that the word for the idea of distance from top to bottom was zodige, we would have had difficulty communicating with others. To be of value, people must share the symbols/terms for concepts and their definitions with others. Most of the concepts we use in everyday life have vague, unclear definitions. Likewise, the values and experiences of people in a specific culture can influence or limit everyday concepts. Preindustrial people in a remote area without electricity who never used a telephone have trouble understanding the concept of a computer or the Internet. Also, some everyday concepts (e.g., evil spirits, demons) have roots in misconceptions, ancient myth, or folklore. Everyday concepts and those used in social science differ, but the difference is not rigid or sharp. Some social science concepts first developed in research studies with precise technical definitions have diffused into the larger culture and language. Over time, they have become less precise or developed an altered meaning. Concepts such as sexism, lifestyle, peer group, urban sprawl, and social class started as technical concepts in a social theory (Neuman 2014) Topic-021: Causation vs Correlation While linking variables sociologists should be careful not to confuse correlation, when two variables that are related in such a way that a change in one is accompanied by a change in the other, with causation, when a change in one variable creates a change in another variable. To establish causation, (1) the two variables must be related; (2) the cause must precede the effect; and (3) the relationship between the two variables must persist when all other relevant variables are controlled. Sometimes an apparent relationship between two variables is meaningless. We call this type of relationship spurious. For example, it could be demonstrated that as the deadline for filing income taxes approaches, the sale of swimsuits ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 21  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU increases. Despite the strong statistical correlation between the two, it would be ludicrous to assume that filing income taxes causes people to want to wear swimsuits. A much more likely explanation is that because the tax filing deadline falls on April 15, about the same time summer clothing debuts in department stores, people begin to anticipate the oncoming swimming season. Can you think of examples of spurious relationships that are commonly accepted and may go unchallenged? For example, does watching violence on television lead to aggressive and violent behavior? Does capital punishment deter crime? (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Topic-022: Is Sociology a Science? Sociology uses scientific methods to study social phenomena. It relies on empirical observation, data analysis, and theory building to understand the social world. It aims to develop testable and falsifiable explanations of social phenomena. It incorporates peer review and replication to ensure the validity and reliability of findings. However, some argue that sociology cannot be a science due to the complexity and subjectivity of social phenomena. Others argue that sociology can be a science if it adheres to scientific methods and principles. Example from Sociology: Studying the relationship between religion and mental health using scientific methods. ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 22  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Lesson 05 RESEARCH DESIGNS IN SOCIOLOGY Lesson Overview Doing Sociology: Research Process Research Designs: Survey Research Designs: Case Study Research Designs: Observation Research Designs: Experiment Research Designs: Secondary data Research Ethics Topic-023: Doing Sociology: Research Process Defining the research problem and research question. Developing a research hypothesis and theoretical framework. Selecting an appropriate research design and research methods. Collecting data through primary or secondary sources. Analyzing and interpreting the data using statistical or qualitative methods. Drawing conclusions and making generalizations based on the data. Disseminating the research findings through publications or presentations. Example: Conducting a study on the impact of social media on mental health among Pakistani youth. First, why do we need sociological research? Why can’t we simply depend on common sense, on “what everyone knows”? In order to answer a question, we need to move beyond guess work and common sense. We want to know what is really going on. To find out, sociologists do research on about every aspect of social life (Henslin 2011). A Research Model Scientific research follows eight basic steps which are presented as follows: Selecting a Topic The first step is to select a topic. What do you want to know more about? Many sociologists simply follow their curiosity, their drive to learn more about social life. They become interested in a particular topic and they pursue it. Some sociologists choose a topic because funding is available for that topic, others because a social problem such as domestic violence is in the news, and they want to help people better understand it—and perhaps to help solve it. Defining the Problem The second step is to define the problem, to specify what you want to learn about the topic. My interest in the homeless increased until I wanted to learn about homelessness across the nation. Ordinarily, sociologists’ interests are much more focused than this; they examine some specific aspect of the topic, such as how homeless people survive on the streets. In the case of spouse abuse, sociologists may want to know whether violent and nonviolent husbands ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 23  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU have different work experiences. Or they may want to learn what can be done to reduce spouse abuse. The topics that sociologist’s study are far-ranging. In fact, sociologists do research on any aspect of social life that interests them. Reviewing the Literature You must read what has been published on your topic. This helps you to narrow the problem, identify areas that are already known, and learn what areas need to be researched. Reviewing the literature may also help you to pinpoint the questions that you will ask. You might even find out that the problem has been answered already. You don’t want to waste your time rediscovering what is already known. Formulating a Hypothesis The fourth step is to formulate a hypothesis, a statement of what you expect to find according to predictions from a theory. A hypothesis predicts a relationship between or among variables, factors that change, or vary, from one person or situation to another. For example, the statement “Men who are more socially isolated are more likely to abuse their wives than are men who are more socially integrated” is a hypothesis. Your hypothesis will need operational definitions—that is, precise ways to measure the variables. In this example, you would need operational definitions for three variables: social isolation, social integration, and spouse abuse. Choosing a Research Method You then need to decide how you are going to collect your data. Sociologists use seven basic research methods (or research designs), which are outlined in the next section. You will want to choose the research method that will best answer your questions. Collecting the Data When you gather your data, you must take care to assure their validity; that is, your operational definitions must measure what they are intended to measure. In this case, you must be certain that you really are measuring social isolation, social integration, and spouse abuse—and not something else. Spouse abuse, for example, seems to be obvious. Yet what some people consider to be abuse is not regarded as abuse by others. Which definition will you choose? In other words, you must state your operational definitions so precisely that no one has any question about what you are measuring. Analyzing the Results You can choose from a variety of techniques to analyse the data you gather. If a hypothesis has been part of your research, now is when you will test it. (Some research, especially participant observation, and case studies, has no hypothesis. You may know so little about the setting you are going to research that you cannot even specify the variables in advance.) With today’s software, in just seconds you can run tests on your data that used to take days or even weeks to perform. Two basic programs that sociologists and many undergraduates use are Micro case and the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Some software, such as the Meteorologist's Toolchest, provides advice about collecting data and even about ethical issues. Disseminating the Results ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 24  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU To wrap up your research, you will write a report to share your findings with the scientific community. You will review how you did your research, including your operational definitions. You will also show how your findings fit in with what has already been published on the topic and how they support or disagree with the theories that apply to your topic. When research is published, usually in a scientific journal or a book, it “belongs” to the scientific community. Your findings will be available for replication; that is, others can repeat your study to see if they come up with similar results. Research Designs Topic-024: Surveys Let us take the example of “Spousal abuse”. Suppose that you want to know how many wives are abused each year. Some husbands also are abused, of course, but let’s assume that you are going to focus on wives. An appropriate method for this purpose would be the survey, in which you would ask individuals a series of questions. Before you begin your research, however, you must deal with practical matters that face all researchers which are as follows: Selecting a sample: To investigate spousal abuse, ideally, you might want to learn about all wives in the world. Obviously, your resources will not permit such research, and you will have to narrow your population, the target group that you are going to study. Let’s assume that your resources (money, assistants, time) allow you to investigate spouse abuse only on your campus. Let’s also assume that your college enrolment is large, so you won’t be able to survey all the married women who are enrolled. Now you must select a sample, individuals from among your target population. How you choose a sample is crucial, for your choice will affect the results of your research. For example, married women enrolled in introductory sociology and engineering courses might have quite different experiences. If so, surveying just one or the other would produce skewed results. Because you want to generalize your findings to your entire campus, you need a sample that accurately represents the campus. How can you get a representative sample? The best way is to use a random sample. This does not mean that you stand on some campus corner and ask questions of any woman who happens to walk by. In a random sample, everyone in your population (the target group) has the same chance of being included in the study. In this case, because your population is every married woman enrolled in your college, all married women—whether first-year or graduate students, full- or part-time—must have the same chance of being included in your sample. How can you get a random sample? First, you need a list of all the married women enrolled in your college. Then you assign a number to each name on the list. Using a table of random numbers, you then determine which of these women will become part of your sample. (Tables of random numbers are available in statistics books and online, or they can be generated by a computer). Questionnaires and Interviews Even if you have a representative sample and ask neutral questions, you can still end up with biased findings. Questionnaires Questionnaires is the list of questions to be asked, can be administered in ways that are flawed. There are two basic techniques for administering questionnaires. The first is to ask ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 25  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU the respondents to fill them out. These self-administered questionnaires allow a larger number of people to be sampled at a lower cost, but the researchers lose control of the data collection. They don’t know the conditions under which people answered the questions. For example, others could have influenced their answers. The second technique is the interview. Researchers ask people questions, often face to face, sometimes by telephone or e-mail. The advantage of this method is that the researchers can ask each question in the same way. The main disadvantage is that interviews are time-consuming, so researchers end up with fewer respondents. Interviews can also create interviewer bias; that is, the presence of interviewers can affect what people say. For example, instead of saying what they really feel, respondents might give “socially acceptable” answers. Although they may be willing to write their true opinions on an anonymous questionnaire, they won’t tell them to another person. Some respondents even shape their answers to match what they think an interviewer wants to hear. In some cases, structured interviews work best. This type of interview uses closed ended questions—each question is followed by a list of possible answers. Structured interviews are faster to administer, and they make t easier to code (categorize) answers so they can be fed into computer for analysis (Henslin 2011). Topic-025: Case Study To do a case study, the researcher focuses on a single event, situation, or even individual. The purpose is to understand the dynamics of relationships, power, or even the thought processes that led to some event. Sociologist Ken Levi (2009), for example, wanted to study hit men. He would have loved to have had many hit men to interview, but he had access to only one. He interviewed this man repeatedly, giving us an understanding of how someone can kill others for money. Sociologist Kai Erikson (1978), who became intrigued with the bursting of a dam in West Virginia that killed several hundred people, focused on the events that led up to and followed this disaster. For spouse abuse, a case study would focus on a single wife and husband, exploring the couple’s history and relationship. As you can see, the case study reveals a lot of detail about some particular situation, but the question always remains: How much of this detail applies to other situations? This problem of generalizability, which plagues case studies, is the primary reason that few sociologists use this method (Henslin 2011). Topic-026: Observation Using direct or participant observation to collect data on social behavior and interactions. Identifying the social setting and context in which the observation takes place. Recording the data using field notes or audio/video recordings. Analyzing the data using qualitative or quantitative methods. Assessing the strengths and limitations of observational research. Example: Conducting an observation study on the gender dynamics in Pakistani workplaces. Topic-027: Experiments In commonsense language, to experiment means to modify one thing in a situation and then compare an outcome to what existed without the modification. Experiments are useful for determining cause and effect relationships between variables. Experimental research builds on the principles of a positivist approach. Natural scientists (e.g., chemists or biologists) and researchers in related applied fields (e.g., agriculture, engineering, and medicine) conduct experiments. We use experiments in education, criminal justice, journalism, marketing, ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 26  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU nursing, political science, psychology, social work, and sociology to examine many social issues and theories. There are three critical steps in an experiment: (1) start with causal hypothesis, (2) modify one specific aspect of a situation that is closely connected to the cause, and (3) compare outcomes. An experiment can powerfully test and focus evidence about causal relationships. Compared to other research techniques, it has both advantages and limitations, and these help to see where it is most appropriate. The experiment is often artificial. It is a purposeful simplification of the complex social world. Artificial means that the experimenter consciously controls the study situation and purposely incorporates theoretically relevant variables while removing variables without a causal importance for a hypothesis. Artificial also means a sharpened focus and narrowly targeted effects that we may not easily encounter in the natural world (Henslin 2011). Topic-028: Secondary Data Collecting data from existing sources, such as government reports, archives, or surveys. Evaluating the quality and reliability of the secondary data. Using the data to test a research hypothesis or answer a research question. Analyzing the data using statistical or qualitative methods. Assessing the strengths and limitations of secondary data research. Example: Analyzing the demographic trends in Pakistani society using census data. Unobtrusive Measures Researchers sometimes use unobtrusive measures, observing the behaviour of people who are not aware that they are being studied. For example, social researchers studied the level of whisky consumption in a town that was legally “dry” by counting empty bottles in trashcans (Lee 2000). Researchers have also gone high-tech in their unobtrusive measures. To trace customers’ paths through stores, they attach infrared surveillance devices to shopping carts. Grocery chains use these findings to place higher-profit items in more strategic locations (McCarthy 1993). Casino operators use chips that transmit radio frequencies, allowing them to track how much their high rollers are betting at every hand of poker or blackjack (Sanders 2005; Grossman 2007). Billboards read information embedded on a chip in your car key. As you drive by, the billboard displays your name with a personal message (Feder 2007). The same device can collect information as you drive by. Cameras in sidewalk billboards scan the facial features of people who pause to look at its advertising, reporting their sex, race, and how long they looked (Clifford 2008). The billboards, which raise ethical issues of invasion of privacy, are part of marketing, not sociological research (Henslin 2011). Secondary Analysis In secondary analysis, a fourth research method, researchers analyse data that others have collected. For example, if you were to analyse the original interviews from a study of women who had been abused by their husbands, you would be doing secondary analysis. Ordinarily, researchers prefer to gather their own data, but lack of resources, especially money, may make this impossible. In addition, existing data could contain a wealth of information that wasn’t pertinent to the goals of the original researchers, which you can analyse for your own purposes. Like the other methods, secondary analysis also poses its own problems. How can a researcher who did not carry out the initial study be sure that the data were gathered ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 27  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU systematically and recorded accurately and that biases were avoided? This problem plagues researchers who do secondary analysis, especially if the original data were gathered by a team of researchers, not all of whom were equally qualified (Henslin 2011). Documents The fifth method that sociologists use is the study of documents, recorded sources. To investigate social life, sociologists examine such diverse documents as books, newspapers, diaries, bank records, police reports, immigration files, and records kept by organizations. The term documents are broad, and it also includes video and audio recordings. To study spouse abuse, you might examine police reports and court records. These could reveal what percentage of complaints result in arrest and what proportion of the men arrested are charged, convicted, or put on probation. If these were your questions, police statistics would be valuable (Kingsnorth and MacIntosh 2007). Topic-029: Research Ethics In addition to choosing an appropriate research method, we must also follow the ethics of sociology (American Sociological Association 1999). Research ethics require honesty, truth, and openness (sharing findings with the scientific community). Ethics clearly forbid the falsification of results. They also condemn plagiarism—that is, stealing someone else’s work. Another ethical guideline states that research subjects should generally be informed that they are being studied and should never be harmed by the research. Ethics also require that sociologists protect the anonymity of those who provide information. Sometimes people reveal things that are intimate, potentially embarrassing, or otherwise harmful to themselves. Finally, although not all sociologists agree, it generally is considered unethical for researchers to misrepresent themselves (Henslin 2011). ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 28  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU Lesson 06 SOCIAL INTERACTION Lesson Overview Understanding social interaction Types of social interaction: Non-Verbal Types of social interaction: Exchange and Cooperation Types of social interaction: Competition and Conflict Elements of social interaction: Status and Role Processes of social interaction: accommodation and assimilation Processes of social interaction: Amalgamation and diffusion Topic-030: Understanding Social Interaction Social interaction is the process by which people act and react in relation to others and what people do when they come together. Social interaction is the focus of micro sociology. Sociologists who use this approach are likely to analyse the men’s rules, or “codes,” for getting along; their survival strategies (“hustles”); how they divide up money, wine, or whatever other resources they have; their relationships with girlfriends, family, and friends; where they spend their time and what they do there; their language; their pecking order; and so on. Micro sociology is the primary focus of symbolic interventionists. Importance of Understanding Social Interaction Understanding social interaction is important in analyzing and explaining social phenomena and social change. Example from Pakistan: Analyzing the impact of social media on social interaction and communication patterns in Pakistani society. Topic-031: Non-Verbal Non-verbal communication refers to the use of gestures, facial expressions, and body language to convey meaning and emotions. Non-verbal communication can be intentional or unintentional and can have significant impacts on social interaction and relationships. Non- verbal communication can vary across cultures and can sometimes lead to misunderstandings and conflicts. Example from Pakistan: Examining the use of non-verbal communication in Pakistani culture and its role in social interaction and relationships. Topic-032: Types of Social Interaction Exchange and Cooperation: Exchange is perhaps the most basic form of social interaction (Blau, 1963, 1964). Exchange can be voluntary or coerced and can occur in various social contexts, such as markets, families, or organizations. Social exchange theorists maintain that our interactions with others are guided by the “profit motive”; that is, we seek to maximize rewards and minimize costs (Homans, 1961). Social exchange is based on the norm of reciprocity—that we help and not harm those who have helped us (Gouldner, 1960). This norm establishes the expectation that gifts, recognition, love, and other favors will be returned. In a day, people exchange smiles, waves, and other simple courtesies. Exchanges of this kind are most often taken for granted— at least until people fail to meet our expectations. The norm of reciprocity, of course, has a ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 29  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU negative side, which includes the expectation that hostilities, threats, social slights, and other acts meant to harm will be reciprocated. Exchange theorists believe that people, groups, organizations, and nations keep a running account of what they are owed and what they owe others. Top priority is given to exchange relationships with business partners, political allies, friends, kin, or lovers who provide the greatest benefits at the lowest costs. Because people have an interest in searching for the most favourable cost-benefit ratios in their dealings with others, relationships are forever shifting. Nevertheless, exchanges and ties of mutual obligation are vital social glue (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Cooperation is a pattern of interaction in which individuals, groups, and societies work together to achieve shared goals. Cooperation is fundamental to human survival; without its social life would be impossible. Cooperation sustains routine, face-to- face encounters. It is also necessary if people are to make love, raise children, protect themselves, and make a living. Some societies place greater emphasis on cooperation than others. For example, the Japanese, whose norms, and values promote sharing and “selflessness,” have altered the American version of baseball, which stresses individualism and encourages “stars” to stand out from the group. In Japan, people expect all players to exhibit we, a sense of team spirit that obligates the individual to subordinate everything to the group. Team members always eat together and sleep together (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Topic-033: Competition and Conflict Competition is much like cooperation, in that both individuals and groups strive to achieve a shared goal. It differs from cooperation, however, in that in competition, instead of joining with others to achieve valued goals, people or groups contest for them, recognizing that society’s prizes are in limited supply and only one person or group can attain them. Competitive relationships are especially common to capitalist economies and pervade almost all aspects of people’s lives. For example, corporations compete for customers, professional athletes vie for prizes, students compete for grades, political rivals contest for votes, and even pastors must win converts from competitors (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Conflict is a pattern of interaction in which people or groups struggle to achieve a “commonly prized object or goal” (Nisbet, 1970:75). Conflict is especially common when competitors violate rules and seek to gain their objective by any means available. Robert Nisbet (1970:76) wrote, “There is no group or relationship, however small and intimate, in which conflict does not occasionally occur.” We most often consider conflict to be opposed to human interests, harmful to the social order, and something to be avoided or resolved as quickly as possible. Yet, as conflict theorists emphasize, conflict has a positive side. It may enhance social solidarity, for nothing reduces conflicts and strains within a relationship (whether marital or between nations) better than an external threat (Simmel 1955; Coser, 1956; Nisbet, 1970). As Robert Nisbet (1970:76) observed, it also may serve as a vehicle for social change in which stagnant beliefs and values are dissolved, old tyrannies loosened, and individuals released to achieve new and higher goals (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Coercion When people or groups are compelled to interact with each other, coercion is the glue that binds them together. Coercion is the actualization of the threat of force that those with power ©Copyright Virtual University of Pakistan 30  Introduction to Sociology-SOC101 VU sometimes use to achieve their objectives. For example, in the United States, education is compulsory; children must attend school whether they want to or not. The relative strength of coercion as a cohesive force lies not so much in blatant expressions of power and authority as in the myriad expressions it may assume in everyday life. Ridicule, gossip, the silent treatment, and withdrawal of affection are but a handful of coercive devices people use in their daily interactions with others. Coercion involves an individual or group that dominates another, the superordinate, and a person or group that is dominated, the subordinate. There cannot be one without the other for, as Georg Simmel ( 1955) noted, the behavior of one is conditioned by the other (Thomson and Hickey 2016). Topic-034: Elements of Social Interaction: Status and Role Status: In every society, people build their everyday lives using the idea of status, a social position that a person holds. In everyday use, the word status generally means “prestige,” as when we say that a college president has more “status” than a newly hired assistant professor. But sociologically speaking, both “president” and “professor” are statuses, or positions, within the collegiate organization. Status is part of our social identity and helps define our relationship to others. As Georg Simmel (1950:307, orig. 1902), one of the founders of sociology, once pointed out, before we can deal with anyone, we need to know who the person is (Macionis 2012). Example from Pakistan: Analyzing the role of status and role in the Pakistani caste system and its impact on social mobility. Status Set Each of us holds many statuses at once. The term status set refers to all the statuses a person holds at a give