Social Mobility in the 20th Century

Hertel, Florian R.

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-14785-3

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The former finding that a horizontal differentiation is already present at the lower layer of the social space is most likely due to educational expansion and the increased importance of cultural capital for lower social classes due to de-industrialization and new class divisions, e.g. between industrial and service occupations (Hertel 2017;Oesch 2006). The latter finding that the elite class is characterized by both the highest economic and cultural capital is more challenging to understand.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Space of Capital: A Latent Class Analysis of Capital Portfolios in Germany

Waitkus¹,

Groh-Samberg

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research at DIW BerlinThis series presents research findings based either directly on data from the German SocioEconomic Panel study (SOEP) or using SOEP data as part of an internationally comparable data set (e.g. CNEF, ECHP, LIS, LWS, CHER/PACO). SOEP is a truly multidisciplinary household panel study covering a wide range of social and behavioral sciences: economics, sociology, psychology, survey methodology, econometrics and applied statistics, educational science, political science, public health, behavioral genetics, demography, geography, and sport science.The decision to publish a submission in SOEPpapers is made by a board of editors chosen by the DIW Berlin to represent the wide range of disciplines covered by SOEP. There is no external referee process and papers are either accepted or rejected without revision. Papers appear in this series as works in progress and may also appear elsewhere. They often represent preliminary studies and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be requested from the author directly.Any opinions expressed in this series are those of the author(s) and not those of DIW Berlin.Research disseminated by DIW Berlin may include views on public policy issues, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. University of Bremen Abstract:The aim of this paper is to construct the "space of capital" based on disaggregated measures of capital portfolios and to analyze the dynamics of class mobility over time. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu's concept of the "social space", we argue that it is possible to directly assess the structural dimensions of the social space as a space of (economic and cultural) capital, including wealth as an important but often neglected form of economic capital. Using household panel data from 2002-2012 (SOEP), we apply latent class analysis in order to detect distinct classes based on specific capital portfolios. We find nine classes with diverging capital portfolios. When interpreting the nine latent classes, we find clear evidence for the two main axis of the social space, namely the vertical axis of the overall volume of capital, and the horizontal axis representing the composition of capital in terms of the relative weight of economic and cultural capital. Further exploration of class mobility reveals that the horizontal ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Space of Capital: A Latent Class Analysis of Capital Portfolios in Germany

Waitkus¹,

Groh-Samberg

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Weitere untersuchte Klassenschemen heben horizontale Unterschiede zwischen vertikal gegliederten Gruppen hervor. Die hier untersuchten Klassifizierungen von Oesch (2006Oesch ( , 2013 und Hertel (2017) beziehen sich unterschiedlich stark auf frühere, rein heuristische Unterscheidungen zwischen Mittelklassepositionen entweder entlang der Gegenüberstellung von fordistischen und postindustriellen…”

Section: Oesch Und Ipics: Berufsklassen Als Folgen Ausdifferenzierter Arbeitslogikenunclassified

“…Berufspositionen (Assimakopoulou, Esping-Andersen, & Van Kersbergen, 1992;Esping-Andersen, 1993) oder Ansätzen, die freie Berufe und Professionen mit Manager:innen und Administrator:innen kontrastieren (Gallie, White, Cheng, & Tomlinson, 1998;Kriesi, 1989;Müller, 1998 (Hertel, 2017;Oesch, 2013). Beschäftigten beeinflussen und innerhalb derselben Arbeitslogiken homogenisieren.…”

Section: Oesch Und Ipics: Berufsklassen Als Folgen Ausdifferenzierter Arbeitslogikenunclassified

“…ESEG entspricht Prototyp 2, während Prototyp 1 sich von ESEC ableitete. Präferenzen als auch objektive Ungleichheiten abbilden zu können (Hertel, 2017). Dabei stehen hier, wie auch bei Oesch oder MICRO, die Sozialisationserfahrungen während der Karriere und dem alltäglichen Berufsleben im Vordergrund, die bei Klassenangehörigen zu ähnlichen Präferenzen und Handlungsstrategien führen sollen (Kohn, 1963(Kohn, , 1969(Kohn, , 1976Lareau, 2011Lareau, [2003).…”

Section: Oesch Und Ipics: Berufsklassen Als Folgen Ausdifferenzierter Arbeitslogikenunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Was (ver-)messen eigentlich Klassen? Zum Zusammenhang zwischen unterschiedlicher Operationalisierung sozialer Klassen und ihrer Erklärungskraft mit Blick auf Stratifikation und Ungleichheit in Deutschland

Hertel¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deutsch: Darüber, wie die soziale Position in einer Gesellschaft am besten gemessen werden sollte, besteht keine Einigkeit. Da die Operationalisierung jedoch weitreichende Folgen für Forschungsdesign und Interpretation der Ergebnisse hat, werden hier sieben Konzeptionen sozialer Positionen auf ihre Erklärungskraft für ganz unterschiedliche Phänomene hin verglichen. Die Analyse sucht damit die vor allem methodische Frage zu beantworten, ob und wie sich die einzelnen Klassenmessungen in ihrer Erklärungskraft bezüglich Stratifikation und Klassenungleichheit bei 35 Eigenschaften von rund 25.000 Allbus-Befragten in Deutschland unterscheiden. Die Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass Klassenzugehörigkeit Menschen nur in wenigen der hier untersuchten Eigenschaften wirklich stratifiziert. Gleichzeitig lassen sich aber bedeutende Klassenungleichheiten bei objektiven Statusindikatoren und intergenerationalen Mobilitätsmessungen finden. Während insgesamt Mikroklassen die höchste Erklärungskraft aufweisen, sind die Unterschiede in Bereichen, in denen aggregierte Klassifikationen eine besondere Erklärungsleistung für sich beanspruchen, marginal. Die Ergebnisse empfehlen neben den quasi paradigmatischen ESEC-Klassen auch andere der hier vorgestellten Klassifizierungen ergänzend in der Ungleichheitsanalyse einzusetzen. English: There is little agreement how to best measure social class position in contemporary societies. The chosen measurement, however, has substantial implications for a study‘s design and the interpretation of its findings. Therefore, I empirically compare the explanatory power of nine alternative social class concepts regarding their ability to map stratification and identify class inequality. The analysis is repeated for 35 characteristics measured in the Allbus data 1980 to 2018 for almost 25,000 individuals. Results indicate that class membership stratifies only few of the studied attributes. At the same time class concepts are able to detect meaningful class inequality especially in terms of but not limited to objective SES measures and social mobility indicators. While microclasses outperform more aggregated class measures in general, the differences are rather small in subject areas for which the latter theoretically claim particular explanatory power. In the spirit of parsimony, the results hence would seem to suggest the use of the more aggregated classifications at least with regard to some subject matters. I suggest to complement the almost exclusive usage of ESEC in contemporary stratification research with alternative class measures.

show abstract

“…Keeping these caveats in mind, it is important to note that we did not aim to provide a causal analysis of the relationship between inequality and mobility, but rather a conceptually innovative, descriptive account from a sociological perspective. Sociologists have only recently concluded that there has been a modest rise in social fluidity in most countries over the course of the prosperous decades following World War II (Breen 2004;Hertel 2017), but this subtle trend toward openness may mean little to individuals born in this era of increasing inequality. Although we cannot evaluate such a conjecture based on this analysis, we can state with certainty that current mobility chances are more unequally distributed in countries marked by larger between-class inequalities.…”

Section: Limitations and Suggestions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relation between Inequality and Intergenerational Class Mobility in 39 Countries

Hertel

Groh-Samberg

2019

Am Sociol Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the relationship between inter-class inequality and intergenerational class mobility across 39 countries. Previous research on the relationship between economic inequality and class mobility remains inconclusive, as studies have confounded intra- with between-class economic inequalities. We propose that between-class inequality across multiple dimensions accounts for the inverse relationship between inequality and mobility: the larger the resource distance between classes, the less likely it is that mobility from one to the other will occur. We consider inequality in terms of between-class differences in three areas—education, wages, and income—and in a composite measure. Building on sociological mobility theory, we argue that cross-country variation in mobility results, in part, from families adapting to different levels of between-class inequality. Consistent with this hypothesis, we find a negative correlation between inter-class inequality and social fluidity, with between-class inequality being a better predictor of mobility chances than conventional distributional measures. We also find that the resource distance between classes is negatively related to the strength of their intergenerational association for some off-diagonal origin and destination (OD) class combinations.

show abstract

Social Mobility in the 20th Century

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

The Space of Capital: A Latent Class Analysis of Capital Portfolios in Germany

The Space of Capital: A Latent Class Analysis of Capital Portfolios in Germany

Was (ver-)messen eigentlich Klassen? Zum Zusammenhang zwischen unterschiedlicher Operationalisierung sozialer Klassen und ihrer Erklärungskraft mit Blick auf Stratifikation und Ungleichheit in Deutschland

The Relation between Inequality and Intergenerational Class Mobility in 39 Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About