File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Field and Ecology

TitleField and Ecology
Authors
KeywordsBourdieu
Chicago School
ecology
field
social space
Issue Date2016
Citation
Sociological Theory, 2016, v. 34, n. 1, p. 62-79 How to Cite?
AbstractThis article offers a theoretical comparison between field and ecology, as developed by Pierre Bourdieu and the Chicago School of sociology. While field theory and ecological theory share similar conceptualizations of actors, positions, and relations, and while they converge in their views on structural isomorphism, temporality, and social psychology, they are quite different on several other scores: power and inequality, endogeneity, heterogeneity, metaphorical sources, and abstraction. With a fine-grained comparison of the two approaches, this article provides the basis for a continuous dialogue among social theorists and empirical researchers regarding the nature of social space, its structural and processual composition, and how it changes over time.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/324954
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 4.1
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.068
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Sida-
dc.contributor.authorEmirbayer, Mustafa-
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-27T07:28:32Z-
dc.date.available2023-02-27T07:28:32Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationSociological Theory, 2016, v. 34, n. 1, p. 62-79-
dc.identifier.issn0735-2751-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/324954-
dc.description.abstractThis article offers a theoretical comparison between field and ecology, as developed by Pierre Bourdieu and the Chicago School of sociology. While field theory and ecological theory share similar conceptualizations of actors, positions, and relations, and while they converge in their views on structural isomorphism, temporality, and social psychology, they are quite different on several other scores: power and inequality, endogeneity, heterogeneity, metaphorical sources, and abstraction. With a fine-grained comparison of the two approaches, this article provides the basis for a continuous dialogue among social theorists and empirical researchers regarding the nature of social space, its structural and processual composition, and how it changes over time.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofSociological Theory-
dc.subjectBourdieu-
dc.subjectChicago School-
dc.subjectecology-
dc.subjectfield-
dc.subjectsocial space-
dc.titleField and Ecology-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0735275116632556-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84962905827-
dc.identifier.volume34-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage62-
dc.identifier.epage79-
dc.identifier.eissn1467-9558-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000373972000004-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats