Is standardization silencing sociology?

Taj Mahon-Haft

The field of sociology has changed considerably in recent decades, exhibiting a steady trend towards the production of continuously more quantitative, objective, technical literature. This study seeks to determine if these developments are the result of suitable adaptation and contagion processes, whereby organizations adopt the effective, beneficial practices of others, or if they are the product of institutional isomorphism, whereby organizations in a field are pressured to conformity that is ultimately detrimental to the field (Dimaggio and Powell, 1983). To do so, the amount of isomorphic pressure within the field of sociology was measured at 15-year intervals in an effort to determine if it has been steadily increasing as the standardization of sociological texts has been observed. The amount of isomorphic pressure from each of the three mechanisms (mimetic, coercive, and normative) was measured through network analysis of the organizational interactions contributing to the publication of two highly influential journal publications, the American Sociological Review and the American Journal of Sociology. Based on these measurements, the amount of coercive and mimetic isomorphic pressure has been steadily increasing, while normative pressures have fluctuated. These findings suggest that coercive and mimetic isomorphism have been influential in shaping sociological practices. In seeking further evidence, this study sought to determine if the standardization of sociology has been detrimental for the field, as that is a defining characteristic of institutional isomorphism. To do so, the amount of mainstream media attention paid to sociology and its texts was measured over time through examination of the New York Times historic database of articles and book reviews. It was found that since the mid-1970s, the increasing standardization of sociological writing has been met by a steady decrease in the amount of mainstream media attention. This suggests that the developing standardization of sociological literature has negatively affected its cultural potency. Combined with earlier evidence that the amount of coercive and mimetic pressure has increased with increasing standardization, these results strongly suggest that institutional isomorphism was instrumental in shaping sociology’s recent developments. The negative result witnessed here further suggests that the changes are not as benevolent as has been assumed before, suggesting that they were less the product of suitable adaptation and contagion processes, and that their effects should be considered and monitored.

Is standardization silencing sociology?

Files and links (1)

Abstract

Metrics

Details