Basic Concepts of Sociology and Davis-Moore’s Theory of Stratification
Basic Concepts (p. 34-36)
A basic element of science is the concept, a mental construct that represents some part of the world in a simplified form. Sociologists use concepts to label aspects of social life. A variable is a concept whose value changes from case to case. (“Height”, for example, has a value that varies from person to person). The use of variables depends on measurement, a procedure for determining the value of a variable in a specific case. Some variables are easy to measure, as when a nurse checks our blood pressure. But measuring sociological variables can be far more difficult because the value of any variable in part depends on how it is defined.
Research requires that sociologists operationalize a variable by specifying exactly what is to be measured before assigning a value to a variable.
Correlation and Cause
Correlation means a relationship in which two (or more) variables change together. But sociologists want to know not just how variables change but which variable changes the other. The ideal is to determine cause and effect, a relationship in which change in one variable causes change in another. (Durkheim found that the degree of social integration (the cause) affected the suicide rate (the effect)).
Scientists refer to the variable that causes the change as the independent variable and the variable that changes as the dependent variable.
Just because two variables change together does not necessarily mean that they have a cause-and-effect relationship. There is a correlation that is called spurious correlation, which is an apparent but false relationship between two (or more) variables that is caused by some other variable.
To be sure of a real cause-and-effect relationship, we must show that variables are correlated, the independent variable occurs before the dependent variable, and there is no evidence that a third variable has been overlooked.
Davis and Moore’s (Functionalist) Theory of Stratification: Tumin’s Critique (p. 108-109)
Davis and Moore’s theory provoked a lengthy debate. Tumin, their most famous opponent, produced a comprehensive criticism of their ideals.
Tumin’s Critique
Functional Importance
Davis and Moore tended to assume that the most highly rewarded positions are indeed the most important. Many occupations, however, can be seen as vital to society. Tumin, therefore, argued that ‘some labor force or unskilled workmen is as important and as indispensable to the factory as some labor force of engineers’. Whether lawyers and doctors are considered more important than farm laborers and refuse collectors is simply a matter of opinion.
Power and Rewards
Tumin argued that Davis and Moore ignored the influence of power on the unequal distribution of rewards. Differences in pay and prestige may be due to differences in their power rather than their functional importance.
The Pool of Talent
Davis and Moore assumed that only a limited number of individuals have the talent to acquire the skills necessary for the functionally most important positions. Tumin regarded this as a very questionable assumption for two reasons:
- An effective method of measuring talent and ability has yet to be devised.
- The pool of talent in society may be considerably larger than Davis and Moore assumed.
Training
Tumin also questioned the view that the training required for important positions should be regarded as a sacrifice and therefore in need of compensation. He noted that any loss of earnings can usually be made up during the first ten years of work, and continuing high pay after that may not be justified.
Motivation
The major function of unequal rewards, according to Davis and Moore, is to motivate talented individuals and allocate them to the functionally most important positions. Tumin argued that social stratification can, and often does, act as a barrier to the motivation and recruitment of talent. This is reflected in the tendency for those from lower social classes to leave the education system earlier than those from higher classes.
Inequality and Opportunity
Tumin concluded that stratification, by its very nature, can never adequately perform the functions that Davis and Moore assigned to it. He argued that those born into the lower strata can never have the same opportunities for realizing their talents as those born into the higher strata.
Social Divisions
Tumin questioned the view that social stratification functions to integrate the social system. He argued that differential rewards can ‘encourage hostility, suspicion, and distrust among the various segments of a society’. From this viewpoint, stratification is a divisive rather than an integrating force.
an integrating force.