Micro-Macro Perspective

Micro and Macro Sociological Perspectives
Unit 2: In this unit you are introduced to the general perspectives used in sociology. As we study and attempt to understand human behavior and human societies we shall use two very broad perspectives. The first of these is called 'micro-sociology,' where the relationships between individuals are examined. Topics in this area include socialization, crime and delinquency, sex and gender roles. The second is 'macro-sociology,' the study of larger social structures such as social class, religion, the family, social organizations and so forth.


THEORY AND RESEARCH:Approaches in Sociology
General
In sociology there are two very broad ways of dividing sociological knowledge: micro and macro. Micro sociology tends to focus upon the action of individuals in groups, how the group affects us, our values, beliefs and behaviors. Macro sociology focuses upon the scale and structure of society, relationships among groups and structures. Sociology is still in the early stage of theoretical development, sometimes called schools of thought or paradigms.
A. Microsociology
Microsociology is concerned with the interactions, exchanges and choices of people as affected by the social context in which the occur. The approach in sociology is often referred to as Social Psychology and draws upon two theoretical perspectives within this broad approach: Choice and Symbolic interaction. These views have diverse philosophical roots that are discussed fully in the Microsociology topic.
B. Macrosociology
The Macrosociological approach is concerned with the discovery of structure within the society as a whole, the examination of large scale relationships in society, of the relationships among the structures within the society. Structures set the tone for behavior, the context within which behavior takes place. Two sub-perspectives occur within this broader approach: conflict and functional.
I. Microsociology
A. General
The theoretical perspectives here are ones concerned with interactions, exchanges and choices. Two theoretical approaches occur within this broad perspective: Choice and Symbolic Interactionist. Choice theories concern the ways in which people make choices within the society and the factors that affect those choices. The symbolic interactionist theories are concerned with 1) the study of interactions and how qualities of individuals flow from these interactions, and 2) how structures in the society develop from the repeated interactions of individuals.
1. Choice theories:
a. Philosophical roots:
Choice theories have their roots in the philosophical discussions of hedonism, and pleasure / pain theories of behavior. According to these philosophies human beings act to maximize pleasure (hedonistic activity) and to avoid pain and punishment. In this discussion, pleasures become "benefits" pain become "costs." Note that this is used to a degree in economic theories of behavior.
b. Costs and benefits
Sociologists expand the notion of costs, build upon the ideas of exchange. For example, those of us in a situation such as that represented by this class, act out of a sense of exchange of "value." The interactions are based upon exchanges, some of which are economic, but many others are social and social-psychological. That is, you have paid money to enroll in the class, in exchange you expect examinations, notes, ideas and so on. In addition to this "economic" exchange, there is a social exchange even if somewhat limited (in the case of this class, very limited). However, I attempt to increase commitment and involvement by responding quickly to questions, to sending Email and so on. In this way we become involved in more than just simple "economic exchange," the interaction involves much more. I attempt to encourage each of you to communicate (exchange) with others in the class. However, the gains that you immediately perceive from these exchanges usually mean that the relationships will be weak and transitory, if they develop at all.
c. Act in self-interest
Much of the theorizing here argues that we will often act in our own self-interest, that we engage in interaction only to the degree that there is clear benefit to ourselves, as suggested in the description above.
2. Altruism
If all interaction is based upon self interest then it is difficult to account for self-sacrificing behavior, these seemingly go against such actions. Here the socio-biologists suggest that it is in our "species" self interest when we sacrifice for others. As a part of the survival "strategy," the species has developed a need to participate with others, interaction and understanding the meanings of that interaction is very important part of our survival. It is in the interest of the species to support others of our own kind, thus what appears to be altruistic behavior is actually self-interested behavior, but in the self-interest of the group as a whole.
This is a topic of discussion and debate in the discipline at present. You may want to refer to Berger and to the work of Edmund O. Wilson. To help us with this discussion you should use one of the search engines to locate articles and discussions of sociobiology. If you find points of interest bring them to class to share and send me an Email with the address so that I might add it to this location.
3. Symbolic interaction theory.
This approach to micro-sociology emphasizes the importance of symbols and of interaction. The idea is that human beings generally interact with one another in terms of symbols and meanings. Actions are not just simply actions, they are given meaning. For example if I present you with a balled, closed fist, this action has meaning to you, you interpret it and act accordingly. Of course your interpretation is based upon the context (am I smiling, were we arguing, how well do you know and understand my gestures). It is not just the gestures which are important (animals use gestures -- wagging tails, body posture -- to indicate relationship and states, see the work of Konrad Lorenz and other ethologists), it is the meaning attached to them. Furthermore, we use symbols. That you are able to participate in this course at all attests to our use of symbols. Each letter is a symbol, the combinations are symbols and so on. The power of these is that the combinations convey ideas about our reality. : ^ ) [Look at the combination sideways -- you will see a smiley face. There is an entire list of these that are used by computer geeks to communicate across the network.] These are symbols, and they condition our interactions. Next we turn to some people who developed these ideas in the United States.
a. Cooley and Mead
are the early proponents of this approach to human interaction. Mead (Mind, Self and Society) particularly stressed the importance of symbols in the interaction, pointing to the meanings we attach to symbols, that these symbols and meanings govern the pattern of interaction. Cooley (Human Nature and the Social Order) emphasized the nature of interaction.
b. Cooley: The looking glass self
Cooley suggests that we come to know ourselves in interaction, that people reflect to us who, what we are, they are a mirror for us, reflecting our actions. It is through this reflection we come to know who we are, thus the idea of the looking glass self. I see myself in you, through interaction and it is through this reflected image that I come to know who I am.
c. Mead: self and interaction.
In Mead's formulation the emphasis is upon interaction, how people attempt to influence one another in the exchange. Mead did not see the participants as passive at all. For example, in interaction each of us projects an idea of our self to an other. This is our action. The other sees, hears feels this projection and reflects it to the actor. Actor in turn evaluates the reflections and acts upon it. Actor may re-emphasize the action to convince other s/he is what his/her action says s/he is or may modify the behavior or action to make it consonant with what other has reflected. Again, it is through this active exchange that we come to know who and what we are. Note that the view of Mead is much more active and participatory than that presented by Cooley.
d. Individual self product of interaction
In both of these views, the interaction theorist see the individual self (therefore the individual) to be a product of social interaction. Exchanges between the individuals produce their idea of what the self is.
Other theorists in this realm look to the process of interaction, the symbols and how they are used. For example, note that in most conversations you will send signals, symbols as to the end of the conversation. Sometimes these will be heeded, in others the person will ignore them and keep on talking. This is particularly the case in phone conversation.
Notice that some complete statements such as "Hi, how are you?" are really a symbol in themselves. In this instance we are not actually asking how the other person is, only greeting them. If you want have some fun with others, actually tell the other person how you are!
4. Interaction patterns: attachments and norms
a. attachments:
(see the text for details) a stable and persistent pattern of interaction based upon mutual benefits.
Attachment becomes an important perspective for Stark. He will use this later on to account for what happens in deviance, criminal behavior, in religious behavior and so on.
b. Norms: rules governing behavior.
norms are in effect the expectations that we have for the behavior of other people.
Norms can be quite formal, that is stated (written) as rules. The syllabus and a contract are such formal statements of norms. They spell out what is expected of the parties involved. In the case of the syllabus, the statement is not a reciprocal one, that is it leaves unsaid your particular part in fulfilling these expectations. Norms are also very informal, developing as mutual understandings of what is and is not to be done as a consequence of the continuing interaction among those who are participants in the group. In this class some norms will develop around our communication via Email, phone and face to face in the office.
Folkways, customs, mores and laws are all related to norms. Norm is the general term, these others are variants used to describe the more or less formal nature of particular norms. Folkways and customs are very informal and do not carry particularly severe sanctions (punishments) for their violation. The style of clothing that we wear on particular occasions are governed by folkways (advertising T shirt, the jeans and so on are folk costumes). Customs relate to the usual way of behaving or interacting with others, such things as acting in good taste, in a polite manner. Mores and laws refer to more important or serious rules of behavior. In less formalized groups (tribes) mores are the serious rules that govern who can marry whom, who makes decisions and so on. Our laws are in a sense formalized mores. For a fun, early discussion of how folkways, customs, norms and laws develop see Folkways and Mores by William Graham Sumner, one of the very first American Sociologists.
6. Preferred methodology for the micro approach: the experimental method.
a. Elements of the experimental method
the experimental method involves the use of a control group and an experimental group. Participants are randomly assigned to one or the other group
Both groups are observed before and after the application of the experimental variable or condition. The experimental group is exposed to the experimental variable or condition. The control group is NOT exposed to the experimental variable. A comparison is made of the treatment of the experimental group with the control group to see if it (the experimental treatment) had any effect. If the differences before and after treatment in the experimental group are greater than the differences between the before and after differences in the control group, then we conclude that the treatment had an effect.
Experiments are widely used in the health sciences, psychology and social psychology. For example we might decide to see what effect a particular kind of deliquency prevention program has on young people. We would randomly assign youth from the community to two groups, one will receive the delinquency prevention treatment, the other (the control group) will not. We will measure the level of delinquency in the two groups at some point before the administration of treatment to the experimental group and then again after the treatment. Differences will be measured and we will expect to see the treatment group have a lower level of delinquency. This is a crude example of an experiment.
See Stark for a full and complete discussion of the experimental method
Summary of Micro Sociological Approach to the Study of People
Micro-sociological theories of sociology focus upon the individual in a social context. Although the focus is on the individual, it is the context that is important. The social interactions that take place around us shape us and our views of ourselves. We make choices about how to behave and how not to behave based upon these social contexts. We also are involved in the use of symbols to define ourselves and others. As you pursue the topic of social psychology you will see how groups arise from these exchanges and interactions, from the groups and inter-group relationships arise societies and so on.
II. Macrosociological approach
A. What Social Structure is
Discovery of structure, of large scale relationships in the society, of relationships between structures. As a strange as it may seem the idea of social structure and its influence on human events is in some ways relatively new. The discovery of this structure in the Western European intellectual tradition began in the latter part of 18th Century (see Randall Collins: The Discovery of Society).
A key factor in this discovery seems to have come from the exposure to other cultures that were quite different in development from that of Europe. Until this time, we could imagine the intellectual, philosophical roots focused primarily upon individuals as the driving force for change, for differences among social groups. All of Europe is seen as being descended in one way or another from the same or similar groups of people. With the exploration of the world and of new continents this comfortable idea gets severely challenged by the striking differences among the peoples discovered in the New World (North and South America). Their languages, social organizations were very different from that of Europe. These kinds of insights were re-inforced by the experiences being brought back from Asia. With this discovery, social science and particularly sociology is on its way towards development.
a. Social Structure sets tone for behavior
The structures of society set the tone for behavior -- "milieu," a context for behavior. Stark presents the relationship between religion and delinquency in the community as an example of structural effects. In that discussion he examines why different investigators seem to have found contradictory differences in the way religious participation affects whether or not a young person will become deliqunet.
Notice that he particularly calls attention to the fact that it is not enough for the individual to have strong religious beliefs, it is also necessary that these beliefs occur in a community with such beliefs and that the community structure then reinforces the individual beliefs. This is the influence of the community structure. Later we will explore how the "structure of inequality" influences what we believe and are able to do.
Structure influences behavior, as an example consider how this class is structured and how it influences the pattern of interaction. This is still small scale, but we can see other examples of the effect of structure. For example, in the mid 80s in the Philippines before Corazon Aquino became President, the fighting among people created a great deal of distrust, and a perception among the people that the elections would be unfair. That same structural view also brought down the Ferdinand Marcos government that Corazon Aquino replaced.
Do you see any structural equivalents in the current events in the high school that you attended or at the University of Colorado at Denver?
b. Characteristics of the population as 'structural elements'
Groups and societies differ from one another in a number of ways. One important kind of difference is the 'demographic' makeup of that society. For example, a college campus (kind of group) has a characteristic distribution of ages. The University of Colorado at Boulder student body consists primarily of students between the ages of 17 and 24, in contrast the Auraria complex has a student body made up of students in the early 20s through the 50s. Further, most students on the Auraria campus are likely to be married (or have been married), have children and many work full time. All of these are population or demographic characteristics that describe the student body. These in turn are structural characteristics of the campus 'group.' These characteristics give the Auraria campus a very distinctive quality or flavor that is not found on the Boulder campus.
The United States population has a median age of about 34 in 1996 (Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States, Table 13), with 12.6 % over 65 compared to a median age of 28 and only 9.8 % over 65 in 1970. Mexico has a very young population, median age is about 16 and only a very tiny percent are over the age of 65 (source: Age Profile of the Mexican Population). These are structural characteristics (specifically an age structure) that shapes the things a nation or society must do for its members as well as the things the nation or society is able to do.
Finally, as we shall see when we discuss gender (sex) inequality, the relative numbers of men and women in the society affects the roles that men and women play in the society, the kinds of freedoms they have. Consider that the United States had a sex ratio of 95.7 men per 100 women in 1996 (Table 13), Mexico one of 97 men per 100 women in 1998 (same source as above). This is the 'sex structure' of the society.
B. System:
Macrosociology implies that there is a system, an inter-relation of parts. Each structure of the society has an effect upon other structures, if changes take place in one part of the system it will affect other parts of the society. For example, our economy requires a mobile labor force, one in which the individuals must move all over the country. This has had the effect of drastically reducing the size of the typical family and made the extended family difficult to maintain. Each part of the society is a part of this set of interrelations, some are quite direct, others may work across and through several other structures and parts, making the interrelation indirect.
a. relationships, interdependence of parts.
Models are examples of systems, in which we specify what the parts are and how these parts influence one another. A system implies that the individual elements are linked, related to one another. We may note that the family today is quite different from the family of 100 years ago. We will also note that these differences can be traced to how the economy, religion and education have influenced the family (and how the family in turn has influenced them). We should also be aware that when we say "education," "religion" and so on in this context we do not mean a particular religion, but the structure of religion, the family in general or education in general.
This statement should be taken to mean that if the nature education changes, then it will have some kind of influence on the family, changes in the family will create changes in education.
C. Specific Macrosociological perspectives:
a. conflict
Essentially the conflict perspective sees the structures of society producing conflicting expectations among the members of the society. The net result is that there are groups produced by the structures that have interests that run counter to other groups within the same structure or in a different structural context. For example, the roles of men and women are in a way complementary (i.e., different but necessary for one another). In some instances the structures that these roles are imbedded in may produce conflict between the two groups. The nature of the economic system has placed men in positions of power where they make most of the decisions. Modern technology and educational achievement of women have increased the number of women who work. These changes have in turn brought women into the work place and in that structure they seek power that challenges that of men and places them in conflict with the men. Out of the conflict will come changes in the roles of both men and women.
Stark cites other examples of groups, their interests and the conflict that will occur among them. (see Stark for details)
b. functionalism
The functionalist view of the social system emphasizes connectedness and equilibrium among the parts of the system. Each element affects every other element in the system. Some theorists state it is the natural tendency of a system to maintain a steady state (i.e., an equilibrium). The classic example of this condition is the human body. There are built in mechanisms that maintain body temperature within a relatively narrow range (about 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit). If you exercise violently, you increase the temperature and the body system responds by opening vessels at the surface and increasing the sweating response -- all actions designed to bring the temperature back toward the 'normal' value of 98.6.
Similarly, the idea is that the society is a system that is in equilibrium. If a part of it gets out of whack (the family, for example), mechanisms will come into play to move the part back into balance with the rest of the society.
(see Stark for details)
D. The Methodological approach within macro-sociology: the survey.
The survey is today a very widely used way to collect information about a society at a particular time. You see the results of such surveys almost everyday in the news reports. Whenever a newspaper or TV anchor says "today's poll shows ..." s/he is relying upon a survey. These kinds of surveys are done to describe what the population is thinking. However, sociologists, economists, political scientists and other social scientists use surveys to collect data about people so that hypotheses can be tested.
Additional Course Topics
Unit 1: Sociological Perspective
Unit 3:Individual and Society
Unit 4:Socialization
Topical Outline of Course
Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003 by Richard H. Anderson, the Department of Sociology and the University of Colorado at Denver.
This page last revised: January 17, 2003. Please contact Richard H. Anderson (randerso@carbon.cudenver.edu) if you experience any problems or have comments about these pages.
THEORY AND RESEARCH:Approaches in Sociology
General
In sociology there are two very broad ways of dividing sociological knowledge: micro and macro. Micro sociology tends to focus upon the action of individuals in groups, how the group affects us, our values, beliefs and behaviors. Macro sociology focuses upon the scale and structure of society, relationships among groups and structures. Sociology is still in the early stage of theoretical development, sometimes called schools of thought or paradigms.
A. Microsociology
Microsociology is concerned with the interactions, exchanges and choices of people as affected by the social context in which the occur. The approach in sociology is often referred to as Social Psychology and draws upon two theoretical perspectives within this broad approach: Choice and Symbolic interaction. These views have diverse philosophical roots that are discussed fully in the Microsociology topic.
B. Macrosociology
The Macrosociological approach is concerned with the discovery of structure within the society as a whole, the examination of large scale relationships in society, of the relationships among the structures within the society. Structures set the tone for behavior, the context within which behavior takes place. Two sub-perspectives occur within this broader approach: conflict and functional.
I. Microsociology
A. General
The theoretical perspectives here are ones concerned with interactions, exchanges and choices. Two theoretical approaches occur within this broad perspective: Choice and Symbolic Interactionist. Choice theories concern the ways in which people make choices within the society and the factors that affect those choices. The symbolic interactionist theories are concerned with 1) the study of interactions and how qualities of individuals flow from these interactions, and 2) how structures in the society develop from the repeated interactions of individuals.
1. Choice theories:
a. Philosophical roots:
Choice theories have their roots in the philosophical discussions of hedonism, and pleasure / pain theories of behavior. According to these philosophies human beings act to maximize pleasure (hedonistic activity) and to avoid pain and punishment. In this discussion, pleasures become "benefits" pain become "costs." Note that this is used to a degree in economic theories of behavior.
b. Costs and benefits
Sociologists expand the notion of costs, build upon the ideas of exchange. For example, those of us in a situation such as that represented by this class, act out of a sense of exchange of "value." The interactions are based upon exchanges, some of which are economic, but many others are social and social-psychological. That is, you have paid money to enroll in the class, in exchange you expect examinations, notes, ideas and so on. In addition to this "economic" exchange, there is a social exchange even if somewhat limited (in the case of this class, very limited). However, I attempt to increase commitment and involvement by responding quickly to questions, to sending Email and so on. In this way we become involved in more than just simple "economic exchange," the interaction involves much more. I attempt to encourage each of you to communicate (exchange) with others in the class. However, the gains that you immediately perceive from these exchanges usually mean that the relationships will be weak and transitory, if they develop at all.
c. Act in self-interest
Much of the theorizing here argues that we will often act in our own self-interest, that we engage in interaction only to the degree that there is clear benefit to ourselves, as suggested in the description above.
2. Altruism
If all interaction is based upon self interest then it is difficult to account for self-sacrificing behavior, these seemingly go against such actions. Here the socio-biologists suggest that it is in our "species" self interest when we sacrifice for others. As a part of the survival "strategy," the species has developed a need to participate with others, interaction and understanding the meanings of that interaction is very important part of our survival. It is in the interest of the species to support others of our own kind, thus what appears to be altruistic behavior is actually self-interested behavior, but in the self-interest of the group as a whole.
This is a topic of discussion and debate in the discipline at present. You may want to refer to Berger and to the work of Edmund O. Wilson. To help us with this discussion you should use one of the search engines to locate articles and discussions of sociobiology. If you find points of interest bring them to class to share and send me an Email with the address so that I might add it to this location.
3. Symbolic interaction theory.
This approach to micro-sociology emphasizes the importance of symbols and of interaction. The idea is that human beings generally interact with one another in terms of symbols and meanings. Actions are not just simply actions, they are given meaning. For example if I present you with a balled, closed fist, this action has meaning to you, you interpret it and act accordingly. Of course your interpretation is based upon the context (am I smiling, were we arguing, how well do you know and understand my gestures). It is not just the gestures which are important (animals use gestures -- wagging tails, body posture -- to indicate relationship and states, see the work of Konrad Lorenz and other ethologists), it is the meaning attached to them. Furthermore, we use symbols. That you are able to participate in this course at all attests to our use of symbols. Each letter is a symbol, the combinations are symbols and so on. The power of these is that the combinations convey ideas about our reality. : ^ ) [Look at the combination sideways -- you will see a smiley face. There is an entire list of these that are used by computer geeks to communicate across the network.] These are symbols, and they condition our interactions. Next we turn to some people who developed these ideas in the United States.
a. Cooley and Mead
are the early proponents of this approach to human interaction. Mead (Mind, Self and Society) particularly stressed the importance of symbols in the interaction, pointing to the meanings we attach to symbols, that these symbols and meanings govern the pattern of interaction. Cooley (Human Nature and the Social Order) emphasized the nature of interaction.
b. Cooley: The looking glass self
Cooley suggests that we come to know ourselves in interaction, that people reflect to us who, what we are, they are a mirror for us, reflecting our actions. It is through this reflection we come to know who we are, thus the idea of the looking glass self. I see myself in you, through interaction and it is through this reflected image that I come to know who I am.
c. Mead: self and interaction.
In Mead's formulation the emphasis is upon interaction, how people attempt to influence one another in the exchange. Mead did not see the participants as passive at all. For example, in interaction each of us projects an idea of our self to an other. This is our action. The other sees, hears feels this projection and reflects it to the actor. Actor in turn evaluates the reflections and acts upon it. Actor may re-emphasize the action to convince other s/he is what his/her action says s/he is or may modify the behavior or action to make it consonant with what other has reflected. Again, it is through this active exchange that we come to know who and what we are. Note that the view of Mead is much more active and participatory than that presented by Cooley.
d. Individual self product of interaction
In both of these views, the interaction theorist see the individual self (therefore the individual) to be a product of social interaction. Exchanges between the individuals produce their idea of what the self is.
Other theorists in this realm look to the process of interaction, the symbols and how they are used. For example, note that in most conversations you will send signals, symbols as to the end of the conversation. Sometimes these will be heeded, in others the person will ignore them and keep on talking. This is particularly the case in phone conversation.
Notice that some complete statements such as "Hi, how are you?" are really a symbol in themselves. In this instance we are not actually asking how the other person is, only greeting them. If you want have some fun with others, actually tell the other person how you are!
4. Interaction patterns: attachments and norms
a. attachments:
(see the text for details) a stable and persistent pattern of interaction based upon mutual benefits.
Attachment becomes an important perspective for Stark. He will use this later on to account for what happens in deviance, criminal behavior, in religious behavior and so on.
b. Norms: rules governing behavior.
norms are in effect the expectations that we have for the behavior of other people.
Norms can be quite formal, that is stated (written) as rules. The syllabus and a contract are such formal statements of norms. They spell out what is expected of the parties involved. In the case of the syllabus, the statement is not a reciprocal one, that is it leaves unsaid your particular part in fulfilling these expectations. Norms are also very informal, developing as mutual understandings of what is and is not to be done as a consequence of the continuing interaction among those who are participants in the group. In this class some norms will develop around our communication via Email, phone and face to face in the office.
Folkways, customs, mores and laws are all related to norms. Norm is the general term, these others are variants used to describe the more or less formal nature of particular norms. Folkways and customs are very informal and do not carry particularly severe sanctions (punishments) for their violation. The style of clothing that we wear on particular occasions are governed by folkways (advertising T shirt, the jeans and so on are folk costumes). Customs relate to the usual way of behaving or interacting with others, such things as acting in good taste, in a polite manner. Mores and laws refer to more important or serious rules of behavior. In less formalized groups (tribes) mores are the serious rules that govern who can marry whom, who makes decisions and so on. Our laws are in a sense formalized mores. For a fun, early discussion of how folkways, customs, norms and laws develop see Folkways and Mores by William Graham Sumner, one of the very first American Sociologists.
6. Preferred methodology for the micro approach: the experimental method.
a. Elements of the experimental method
the experimental method involves the use of a control group and an experimental group. Participants are randomly assigned to one or the other group
Both groups are observed before and after the application of the experimental variable or condition. The experimental group is exposed to the experimental variable or condition. The control group is NOT exposed to the experimental variable. A comparison is made of the treatment of the experimental group with the control group to see if it (the experimental treatment) had any effect. If the differences before and after treatment in the experimental group are greater than the differences between the before and after differences in the control group, then we conclude that the treatment had an effect.
Experiments are widely used in the health sciences, psychology and social psychology. For example we might decide to see what effect a particular kind of deliquency prevention program has on young people. We would randomly assign youth from the community to two groups, one will receive the delinquency prevention treatment, the other (the control group) will not. We will measure the level of delinquency in the two groups at some point before the administration of treatment to the experimental group and then again after the treatment. Differences will be measured and we will expect to see the treatment group have a lower level of delinquency. This is a crude example of an experiment.
See Stark for a full and complete discussion of the experimental method
Summary of Micro Sociological Approach to the Study of People
Micro-sociological theories of sociology focus upon the individual in a social context. Although the focus is on the individual, it is the context that is important. The social interactions that take place around us shape us and our views of ourselves. We make choices about how to behave and how not to behave based upon these social contexts. We also are involved in the use of symbols to define ourselves and others. As you pursue the topic of social psychology you will see how groups arise from these exchanges and interactions, from the groups and inter-group relationships arise societies and so on.
II. Macrosociological approach
A. What Social Structure is
Discovery of structure, of large scale relationships in the society, of relationships between structures. As a strange as it may seem the idea of social structure and its influence on human events is in some ways relatively new. The discovery of this structure in the Western European intellectual tradition began in the latter part of 18th Century (see Randall Collins: The Discovery of Society).
A key factor in this discovery seems to have come from the exposure to other cultures that were quite different in development from that of Europe. Until this time, we could imagine the intellectual, philosophical roots focused primarily upon individuals as the driving force for change, for differences among social groups. All of Europe is seen as being descended in one way or another from the same or similar groups of people. With the exploration of the world and of new continents this comfortable idea gets severely challenged by the striking differences among the peoples discovered in the New World (North and South America). Their languages, social organizations were very different from that of Europe. These kinds of insights were re-inforced by the experiences being brought back from Asia. With this discovery, social science and particularly sociology is on its way towards development.
a. Social Structure sets tone for behavior
The structures of society set the tone for behavior -- "milieu," a context for behavior. Stark presents the relationship between religion and delinquency in the community as an example of structural effects. In that discussion he examines why different investigators seem to have found contradictory differences in the way religious participation affects whether or not a young person will become deliqunet.
Notice that he particularly calls attention to the fact that it is not enough for the individual to have strong religious beliefs, it is also necessary that these beliefs occur in a community with such beliefs and that the community structure then reinforces the individual beliefs. This is the influence of the community structure. Later we will explore how the "structure of inequality" influences what we believe and are able to do.
Structure influences behavior, as an example consider how this class is structured and how it influences the pattern of interaction. This is still small scale, but we can see other examples of the effect of structure. For example, in the mid 80s in the Philippines before Corazon Aquino became President, the fighting among people created a great deal of distrust, and a perception among the people that the elections would be unfair. That same structural view also brought down the Ferdinand Marcos government that Corazon Aquino replaced.
Do you see any structural equivalents in the current events in the high school that you attended or at the University of Colorado at Denver?
b. Characteristics of the population as 'structural elements'
Groups and societies differ from one another in a number of ways. One important kind of difference is the 'demographic' makeup of that society. For example, a college campus (kind of group) has a characteristic distribution of ages. The University of Colorado at Boulder student body consists primarily of students between the ages of 17 and 24, in contrast the Auraria complex has a student body made up of students in the early 20s through the 50s. Further, most students on the Auraria campus are likely to be married (or have been married), have children and many work full time. All of these are population or demographic characteristics that describe the student body. These in turn are structural characteristics of the campus 'group.' These characteristics give the Auraria campus a very distinctive quality or flavor that is not found on the Boulder campus.
The United States population has a median age of about 34 in 1996 (Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States, Table 13), with 12.6 % over 65 compared to a median age of 28 and only 9.8 % over 65 in 1970. Mexico has a very young population, median age is about 16 and only a very tiny percent are over the age of 65 (source: Age Profile of the Mexican Population). These are structural characteristics (specifically an age structure) that shapes the things a nation or society must do for its members as well as the things the nation or society is able to do.
Finally, as we shall see when we discuss gender (sex) inequality, the relative numbers of men and women in the society affects the roles that men and women play in the society, the kinds of freedoms they have. Consider that the United States had a sex ratio of 95.7 men per 100 women in 1996 (Table 13), Mexico one of 97 men per 100 women in 1998 (same source as above). This is the 'sex structure' of the society.
B. System:
Macrosociology implies that there is a system, an inter-relation of parts. Each structure of the society has an effect upon other structures, if changes take place in one part of the system it will affect other parts of the society. For example, our economy requires a mobile labor force, one in which the individuals must move all over the country. This has had the effect of drastically reducing the size of the typical family and made the extended family difficult to maintain. Each part of the society is a part of this set of interrelations, some are quite direct, others may work across and through several other structures and parts, making the interrelation indirect.
a. relationships, interdependence of parts.
Models are examples of systems, in which we specify what the parts are and how these parts influence one another. A system implies that the individual elements are linked, related to one another. We may note that the family today is quite different from the family of 100 years ago. We will also note that these differences can be traced to how the economy, religion and education have influenced the family (and how the family in turn has influenced them). We should also be aware that when we say "education," "religion" and so on in this context we do not mean a particular religion, but the structure of religion, the family in general or education in general.
This statement should be taken to mean that if the nature education changes, then it will have some kind of influence on the family, changes in the family will create changes in education.
C. Specific Macrosociological perspectives:
a. conflict
Essentially the conflict perspective sees the structures of society producing conflicting expectations among the members of the society. The net result is that there are groups produced by the structures that have interests that run counter to other groups within the same structure or in a different structural context. For example, the roles of men and women are in a way complementary (i.e., different but necessary for one another). In some instances the structures that these roles are imbedded in may produce conflict between the two groups. The nature of the economic system has placed men in positions of power where they make most of the decisions. Modern technology and educational achievement of women have increased the number of women who work. These changes have in turn brought women into the work place and in that structure they seek power that challenges that of men and places them in conflict with the men. Out of the conflict will come changes in the roles of both men and women.
Stark cites other examples of groups, their interests and the conflict that will occur among them. (see Stark for details)
b. functionalism
The functionalist view of the social system emphasizes connectedness and equilibrium among the parts of the system. Each element affects every other element in the system. Some theorists state it is the natural tendency of a system to maintain a steady state (i.e., an equilibrium). The classic example of this condition is the human body. There are built in mechanisms that maintain body temperature within a relatively narrow range (about 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit). If you exercise violently, you increase the temperature and the body system responds by opening vessels at the surface and increasing the sweating response -- all actions designed to bring the temperature back toward the 'normal' value of 98.6.
Similarly, the idea is that the society is a system that is in equilibrium. If a part of it gets out of whack (the family, for example), mechanisms will come into play to move the part back into balance with the rest of the society. (see Stark for details)