Should Sociologists Plod along and Establish Descriptive Regularities or Seek a Grand Explanation for Them?

Part of a review symposium on John H. Goldthorpe's On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory (Oxford: Oxford U Press, 2000). Goldthorpe's view that the current malaise in sociology could be cured by the integration of rational action theory (RAT) with qu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European sociological review 2001, Vol.17 (4), p.457-464
Main Authors: Grusky, David B., Di Carlo, Matthew
Format: Review
Language:English
Subjects:
Quantitative Methods
Rationality
Review Symposium
Sociological Theory
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 464
container_issue 4
container_start_page 457
container_title European sociological review
container_volume 17
creator Grusky, David B.
Di Carlo, Matthew
description Part of a review symposium on John H. Goldthorpe's On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory (Oxford: Oxford U Press, 2000). Goldthorpe's view that the current malaise in sociology could be cured by the integration of rational action theory (RAT) with quantitative analysis is discussed. Goldthorpe's diagnosis & prescription is addressed as well as alternative diagnosis & prescription, special difficulties in adjunction, & whether Goldthorpe's research program will prevail. It is concluded that the marriage of RAT to quantitative analysis will attract more support for RAT & therefore push it into the mainstream. 15 References. R. Whyte
format review
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60452361</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>522905</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>522905</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j511-86f45358d38e3e685443f7e3dcfac16428650d20886f3c99e01a4d071d8be0e43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjr1OwzAYRS0EEqXwBCye2CL5P-6EUCktUiUQ6R658ZfWrRsH20Hw9kSU6Q73nKt7gSZUKF0wVbJLNCFMqaJkVF6jm5QOhBBFpZ6gY7UPg7e4Co0LPuxcygm_-2Cx8aHbYdNZvEjZbL1Le_wMqYmuz-4L8AfsBm-iyw4SDhFXAEds8DL-Kd-9N53JLnS4HcvNHk6Pt-iqNT7B3X9O0eZlsZmvivXb8nX-tC4OktJCq1ZILrXlGjgoLYXgbQncNq1pqBJMK0ksI3oEeTObAaFGWFJSq7dAQPApejjP9jF8DpByfXKpAT8egjCkWhEhGVd0BO_P4CHlEOs-upOJP7VkbEYk_wU2I194</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>review</recordtype><pqid>60452361</pqid></control><display><type>review</type><title>Should Sociologists Plod along and Establish Descriptive Regularities or Seek a Grand Explanation for Them?</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Grusky, David B. ; Di Carlo, Matthew</creator><creatorcontrib>Grusky, David B. ; Di Carlo, Matthew</creatorcontrib><description>Part of a review symposium on John H. Goldthorpe's On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory (Oxford: Oxford U Press, 2000). Goldthorpe's view that the current malaise in sociology could be cured by the integration of rational action theory (RAT) with quantitative analysis is discussed. Goldthorpe's diagnosis &amp; prescription is addressed as well as alternative diagnosis &amp; prescription, special difficulties in adjunction, &amp; whether Goldthorpe's research program will prevail. It is concluded that the marriage of RAT to quantitative analysis will attract more support for RAT &amp; therefore push it into the mainstream. 15 References. R. Whyte</description><identifier>ISSN: 0266-7215</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2672</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ESOREP</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press in association with the European Consortium for Sociological Research</publisher><subject>Quantitative Methods ; Rationality ; Review Symposium ; Sociological Theory</subject><ispartof>European sociological review, 2001, Vol.17 (4), p.457-464</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2001 Oxford University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/522905$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/522905$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>313,314,780,784,792,33775,58238,58471</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Grusky, David B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Carlo, Matthew</creatorcontrib><title>Should Sociologists Plod along and Establish Descriptive Regularities or Seek a Grand Explanation for Them?</title><title>European sociological review</title><description>Part of a review symposium on John H. Goldthorpe's On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory (Oxford: Oxford U Press, 2000). Goldthorpe's view that the current malaise in sociology could be cured by the integration of rational action theory (RAT) with quantitative analysis is discussed. Goldthorpe's diagnosis &amp; prescription is addressed as well as alternative diagnosis &amp; prescription, special difficulties in adjunction, &amp; whether Goldthorpe's research program will prevail. It is concluded that the marriage of RAT to quantitative analysis will attract more support for RAT &amp; therefore push it into the mainstream. 15 References. R. Whyte</description><subject>Quantitative Methods</subject><subject>Rationality</subject><subject>Review Symposium</subject><subject>Sociological Theory</subject><issn>0266-7215</issn><issn>1468-2672</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>review</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>review</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNotjr1OwzAYRS0EEqXwBCye2CL5P-6EUCktUiUQ6R658ZfWrRsH20Hw9kSU6Q73nKt7gSZUKF0wVbJLNCFMqaJkVF6jm5QOhBBFpZ6gY7UPg7e4Co0LPuxcygm_-2Cx8aHbYdNZvEjZbL1Le_wMqYmuz-4L8AfsBm-iyw4SDhFXAEds8DL-Kd-9N53JLnS4HcvNHk6Pt-iqNT7B3X9O0eZlsZmvivXb8nX-tC4OktJCq1ZILrXlGjgoLYXgbQncNq1pqBJMK0ksI3oEeTObAaFGWFJSq7dAQPApejjP9jF8DpByfXKpAT8egjCkWhEhGVd0BO_P4CHlEOs-upOJP7VkbEYk_wU2I194</recordid><startdate>20011201</startdate><enddate>20011201</enddate><creator>Grusky, David B.</creator><creator>Di Carlo, Matthew</creator><general>Oxford University Press in association with the European Consortium for Sociological Research</general><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20011201</creationdate><title>Should Sociologists Plod along and Establish Descriptive Regularities or Seek a Grand Explanation for Them?</title><author>Grusky, David B. ; Di Carlo, Matthew</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j511-86f45358d38e3e685443f7e3dcfac16428650d20886f3c99e01a4d071d8be0e43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>reviews</rsrctype><prefilter>reviews</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Quantitative Methods</topic><topic>Rationality</topic><topic>Review Symposium</topic><topic>Sociological Theory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Grusky, David B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Carlo, Matthew</creatorcontrib><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Grusky, David B.</au><au>Di Carlo, Matthew</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>GEN</ristype><atitle>Should Sociologists Plod along and Establish Descriptive Regularities or Seek a Grand Explanation for Them?</atitle><jtitle>European sociological review</jtitle><date>2001-12-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>457</spage><epage>464</epage><pages>457-464</pages><issn>0266-7215</issn><eissn>1468-2672</eissn><coden>ESOREP</coden><abstract>Part of a review symposium on John H. Goldthorpe's On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory (Oxford: Oxford U Press, 2000). Goldthorpe's view that the current malaise in sociology could be cured by the integration of rational action theory (RAT) with quantitative analysis is discussed. Goldthorpe's diagnosis &amp; prescription is addressed as well as alternative diagnosis &amp; prescription, special difficulties in adjunction, &amp; whether Goldthorpe's research program will prevail. It is concluded that the marriage of RAT to quantitative analysis will attract more support for RAT &amp; therefore push it into the mainstream. 15 References. R. Whyte</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press in association with the European Consortium for Sociological Research</pub><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0266-7215
ispartof European sociological review, 2001, Vol.17 (4), p.457-464
issn 0266-7215
1468-2672
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60452361
source JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Oxford Journals Online; Sociological Abstracts
subjects Quantitative Methods
Rationality
Review Symposium
Sociological Theory
title Should Sociologists Plod along and Establish Descriptive Regularities or Seek a Grand Explanation for Them?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T19%3A05%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Should%20Sociologists%20Plod%20along%20and%20Establish%20Descriptive%20Regularities%20or%20Seek%20a%20Grand%20Explanation%20for%20Them?&rft.jtitle=European%20sociological%20review&rft.au=Grusky,%20David%20B.&rft.date=2001-12-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=457&rft.epage=464&rft.pages=457-464&rft.issn=0266-7215&rft.eissn=1468-2672&rft.coden=ESOREP&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E522905%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j511-86f45358d38e3e685443f7e3dcfac16428650d20886f3c99e01a4d071d8be0e43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=60452361&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=522905&rfr_iscdi=true