2006
DOI: 10.1093/esr/jcl028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Career Class (Im)mobility of the Social-Cultural Specialists and the Technocrats in the Netherlands

Abstract: Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While evidence is unambiguous that the relevance of the traditional social class cleavage has declined (e.g. Dalton 1984), empirical studies show that social class remains relevant when divisions within the old middle class are taken account of (see Güveli and de Graaf 2007 for a review, Lachat 2007 for Switzerland). Similarly, religion remains significant for voting when not only religious denomination but also religious practise is considered (Kriesi and Trechsel 2008).…”
Section: Stability Of Voting and The Role Of Predispositionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While evidence is unambiguous that the relevance of the traditional social class cleavage has declined (e.g. Dalton 1984), empirical studies show that social class remains relevant when divisions within the old middle class are taken account of (see Güveli and de Graaf 2007 for a review, Lachat 2007 for Switzerland). Similarly, religion remains significant for voting when not only religious denomination but also religious practise is considered (Kriesi and Trechsel 2008).…”
Section: Stability Of Voting and The Role Of Predispositionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, socio‐cultural specialists have specific skills and knowledge involving social services and social‐cultural issues. Extensive validation tests strongly supports this class distinction for The Netherlands (Güveli 2006; Güveli and De Graaf 2007; Güveli, Need, and De Graaf 2007b). The final class background categories we used were: (1) technocrats, (2) socio‐cultural specialists, (3) routine non‐manual occupations; (4) small employers, (5) manual supervisors and skilled manual occupations, and (6) semi‐unskilled manual occupations and farm labourers.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Radovi se dominantno oslanjaju na neoveberovsku klasnu shemu i općenito manje variraju od drugih pregledanih polja istraživanja. Pojedini radovi također su istražili mobilnost u kontekstu klasnih rascjepa karakterističnih za Bourdieuove horizontalne granice klasa (Güveli i De Graaf, 2007) i neodirkemovske mikroklase (Jonsson i dr., 2009 ). Većina je istraživanja provedena u Velikoj Britaniji te u manjoj mjeri u SAD-u i drugim zemljama zapadne Europe (Švedskoj, Nizozemskoj, Njemačkoj i Finskoj).…”
Section: Društvena Mobilnostunclassified