SOCIOL 204 (Sociological Theorizing)

Expanded Reading List

Readings

Theory and Theorizing

  • Abend, G. (2008). The meaning of ‘Theory.’ Sociological Theory, 26(2), 173-199.
  • Alexander, J. C. (1987). What is Theory? Twenty Lectures: Sociological Theory Since World War II. Columbia University Press. (Pp. 1-21).
  • Craib, I. (1992) What’s Wrong with Theory and Why We Still Need it. Modern Social Theory. St Martin’s Press. (Pp. 1-13).
  • Craib, I. (1992) Cutting a Path Through the Jungle. Modern Social Theory. St Martin’s Press. (Pp. 15-31).
  • Davis, M. S. (1971). That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1(2), 309-344.
  • Healy, K. (2017). Fuck nuance. Sociological Theory, 35(2), 118-127.
  • Heiskala, R. (2014). Evidence and interest in social theory An ontological-practical approach. Acta Sociologica, 57(4), 279-292.
  • Joas, H., & Knöbl, W. (2009). What is Theory? Pp. 1-19 in Social Theory: Twenty Introductory Lectures. Cambridge University Press
  • Martin, J. L. (2015) On Theory in Sociology. Pp. 1-44 in Thinking Through Theory. W. W. Norton

Habit and Practice

  • Archer, M. S. (2010). Routine, reflexivity, and realism. Sociological Theory, 28(3), 272-303.
  • Camic, C. (1986). The Matter of Habit. American Journal of Sociology 91,(5), 1039-1087.
  • Casey, E. S. (1984). Habitual body and memory in Merleau-Ponty. In Phenomenology and the Human Sciences (pp. 39-57). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  • Crossley, N. (2013). Habit and habitus. Body & Society, 19(2-3), 136-161.
  • Dalton, B. (2004). Creativity, Habit, and the Social Products of Creative Action: Revising Joas, Incorporating Bourdieu. Sociological Theory, 22(4):603-622
  • Dubrule, A. (2022). Gender and Habit: John Dewey and Iris Marion Young on Embodiment and Transformation. The Pluralist, 17(1), 45-51.
  • Elder‐Vass, D. (2007). Reconciling Archer and Bourdieu in an emergentist theory of action. Sociological Theory, 25(4), 325-346.
  • Engman, A., & Cranford, C. (2016). Habit and the Body: Lessons for Social Theories of Habit from the Experiences of People with Physical Disabilities. Sociological Theory, 34(1), 27-44.
  • Gold, T. (2022). Contentious Tactics as Jazz Performances: A Pragmatist Approach to the Study of Repertoire Change. Sociological Theory, 40(3), 249-271.
  • Gross, N. (2009). A pragmatist theory of social mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 74(3), 358-379.
  • Haslanger, S. (2018). What is a social practice? Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 82, 231-247.
  • King, A. (2000). Thinking with Bourdieu against Bourdieu: A’practical’critique of the habitus. Sociological Theory, 18(3), 417-433.
  • Lau, R. W. (2004). Habitus and the Practical Logic of Practice: An Interpretation. Sociology, 38(2), 369-387
  • Liao, S. Y., & Huebner, B. (2021). Oppressive things. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 103(1), 92-113.
  • Ngo, H. (2016). Racist habits: A phenomenological analysis of racism and the habitual body. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 42(9), 847-872.
  • Ostrow, J. (1987). Habit and inhabitance: an analysis of experience in the classroom. Human Studies, 213-224.
  • Pagis, M. (2010). From abstract concepts to experiential knowledge: Embodying enlightenment in a meditation center. Qualitative Sociology, 33(4), 469-489.
  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, (2), 243-263.
  • Sullivan, S. (2000). Reconfiguring gender with John Dewey: Habit, bodies, and cultural change. Hypatia, 15(1), 23-42.
  • Swidler, A. (2001). What anchors cultural practices. Pp. 74-92 in Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K., and Savigny, E. V., editors, The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. Routledge.
  • Whitford, J. (2002). Pragmatism and the untenable dualism of means and ends: Why rational choice theory does not deserve paradigmatic privilege. Theory and Society, 31(3), 325-363.
  • Winchester, D. (2008). Embodying the faith: Religious practice and the making of a Muslim moral habitus. Social Forces, 86(4), 1753-1780.

Fields, Ecologies, and Institutions

  • Abbott, A. (2005). Linked ecologies: States and universities as environments for professions. Sociological Theory, *23_(3), 245-274.
  • Armstrong, E. A., & Bernstein, M. (2008). Culture, power, and institutions: A multi‐institutional politics approach to social movements. Sociological Theory, 26(1), 74-99.
  • Barley, S. R., & Tolbert, P. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18(1), 93-117.
  • Beckert, J. (2010). Institutional isomorphism revisited: Convergence and divergence in institutional change. Sociological Theory, 28(2), 150-166.
  • Buchholz, L. (2016). What is a global field? Theorizing fields beyond the nation-state. The Sociological Review, 64(2_suppl), 31-60.
  • Dimaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
  • Friedland, R. and Alford, R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. Pp. 232-263 in DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W., editors, The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. University of Chicago Press.
  • Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2011). Toward a general theory of strategic action fields. Sociological Theory, 29(1), 1-26.
  • Frank, D. J., & Meyer, J. W. (2002). The profusion of individual roles and identities in the postwar period. Sociological Theory, *20_(1), 86-105.
  • Go, J. (2008). Global fields and imperial forms: Field theory and the British and American empires. Sociological Theory, 26(3), 201-229.
  • Green, A. I. (2008). The Social organization of desire: The sexual fields approach. Sociological Theory, 26(1), 25-50
  • Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. Pp. 143-163 in DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W., editors, The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. The University of Chicago Press.
  • Kluttz, D. N., & Fligstein, N. (2016). Varieties of sociological field theory. In Handbook of Contemporary Sociological Theory (pp. 185-204). Springer.
  • Krause, M. (2018). How fields vary. The British Journal of Sociology, *69_(1), 3-22.
  • Liu, S., & Emirbayer, M. (2016). Field and Ecology. Sociological Theory, 34(1), 62-79.
  • Martin, J. L. (2003). What is field theory? American Journal of Sociology, 109_(1), 1-49.
  • Martin, P. Y. (2004). Gender as social institution. Social Forces, 82(4), 1249-1273.
  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, *83_(2), 340-363.
  • Meyer, J. W., & Jepperson, R. L. (2000). The ‘actors’ of modern society: The cultural construction of social agency. Sociological Theory, *18_(1), 100-120.
  • Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, *103_(1), 144-181.
  • Schneiberg, M., & Clemens, E. S. (2006). The typical tools for the job: Research strategies in institutional analysis. Sociological Theory, 24(3), 195-227.
  • Silber, I. F. (1995). Space, fields, boundaries: The rise of spatial metaphors in contemporary sociological theory. Social Research, 323-355.
  • Steinmetz, G. (2016). Social fields, subfields and social spaces at the scale of empires: Explaining the colonial state and colonial sociology. The Sociological Review, 64(2), 98-123.
  • Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. (1993). Institutional conditions for diffusion. Theory and Society, 487-511.
  • Wang, Y. (2016). Homology and isomorphism: Bourdieu in conversation with New Institutionalism. The British Journal of Sociology, 67(2), 348-370.
  • Wimmer, A. (2021). Domains of diffusion: How culture and institutions travel around the world and with what consequences. American Journal of Sociology, *126_(6), 1389-1438.

Interactionism and Phenomenology

  • Atkinson, W. (2010). Phenomenological additions to the Bourdieusian toolbox: Two problems for Bourdieu, two solutions from Schutz. Sociological Theory, 28(1), 1-19.
  • Cetina, K. K. (2009). The synthetic situation: Interactionism for a global world. Symbolic Interaction, 32(1), 61-87.
  • Crawley, S. L. (2022). Queering doing gender: The curious absence of ethnomethodology in gender studies and in sociology. Sociological Theory, 40(4), 366-392.
  • Crossley, N. (2001). The phenomenological habitus and its construction. Theory and society, *30_(1), 81-120.
  • Fligstein, N. (2001). Social skill and the theory of fields. Sociological Theory, 19(2):105-125.
  • Hallett, T., & Hawbaker, A. (2021). The case for an inhabited institutionalism in organizational research: interaction, coupling, and change reconsidered. Theory and Society, *50_(1), 1-32.
  • Heiskala, R. (2011). The meaning of meaning in sociology. The achievements and shortcomings of Alfred Schutz’s phenomenological sociology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(3), 231-246.
  • Hitlin, S., & Elder, G. H. (2007). Time, self, and the curiously abstract concept of agency. Sociological Theory, 25(2), 170-191
  • Itzigsohn, J., & Brown, K. (2015). Sociology and the theory of double consciousness: WEB Du Bois’s phenomenology of racialized subjectivity. Du Bois Review, 12(2), 231-248.
  • Reay, M. (2010). Knowledge distribution, embodiment, and insulation. Sociological Theory, *28_(1), 91-107.
  • Surak, K. (2017). Rupture and Rhythm: A Phenomenology of National Experiences. Sociological Theory, 35(4), 312-333.
  • Tavory, I., & Fine, G. A. (2020). Disruption and the Theory of the Interaction Order. Theory and Society, *49_(3), 365-385.
  • Tavory, I. (2018). Between situations: Anticipation, rhythms, and the theory of interaction. Sociological Theory, *36_(2), 117-133.
  • Tavory, I., & Winchester, D. (2012). Experiential careers: the routinization and de-routinization of religious life. Theory and Society, 41, 351-373.
  • Tavory, I., & Eliasoph, N. (2013). Coordinating Futures: Toward a Theory of Anticipation. American Journal of Sociology, 118(4), 908-942.
  • Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2020). Racist Encounters: A Pragmatist Semiotic Analysis of Interaction. Sociological Theory, 38(4), 295-317.
  • Young, I. M. (1980). Throwing like a girl: A phenomenology of feminine body comportment motility and spatiality. Human Studies, 3(1), 137-156.
  • Yancy, G. (2008). Elevators, social spaces and racism: A philosophical analysis. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 34(8), 843-876.

Networks, Relations, and Structures

  • Bourdieu, P. (1985). The social space and the genesis of groups. Social science information, 24(2), 195-220.
  • Crossley, N. (2022). A Dependent Structure of Interdependence: Structure and Agency in Relational Perspective. Sociology, 56(1), 166-182.
  • Dépelteau, F. (2008). Relational Thinking: A Critique of Co‐Deterministic Theories of sructure and Agency.Sociological Theory,26(1), 51-73
  • Elder Vass, D. (2008). Integrating institutional, relational and embodied structure: an emergentist perspective. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(2), 281-299
  • Haslanger, S. (2016). What is a (social) structural explanation? Philosophical Studies, 173, 113–130.
  • Haslanger, S. (2015). Social structure, narrative and explanation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 45(1), 1-15.
  • Joas, H., & Knöbl, W. (2009). Structuralism and Poststructuralism. Pp. 339-370 in Social Theory: Twenty Introductory Lectures. Cambridge University Press.
  • Erikson, E. (2013). Formalist and relationalist theory in social network analysis. Sociological Theory, 31_(3), 219-242.
  • Fuhse, J. A. (2009). The meaning structure of social networks. Sociological theory, 27(1), 51-73.
  • Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103_(2), 281-317.
  • Heiskala, R. (2001). Theorizing power: Weber, Parsons, Foucault and neostructuralism. Social Science Information, 40(2), 241-264
  • Leschziner, V., & Brett, G. (2021). Symbol Systems and Social Structures. Pp. pp. 559-582 in Handbook of Classical Sociological Theory. Springer.
  • Maryanski, A. and Turner, J. (1991). The off spring of functionalism: French and British structuralism. Sociological Theory, 9(1):106-111.
  • Mische, A. (2011) Relational sociology, culture, and agency. Pp. 80-97 in The Sage handbook of Social Network Analysis. Sage Publications.
  • Porpora, D. V. (1989). Four concepts of social structure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 19(2), 195–211
  • Ray, V. (2019). A theory of racialized organizations. American Sociological Review, 84_(1), 26-53.
  • Ritchie, K. (2020). Social structures and the ontology of social groups. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 100(2), 402-424.
  • Reed, I. A. (2013). Power: Relational, discursive, and performative dimensions. Sociological Theory, 31_(3), 193-218.
  • Reed, I. A. (2017). Chains of power and their representation. Sociological Theory, 35(2), 87-117.
  • Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender As a Social Structure: Theory Wrestling with Activism. Gender & Society, 18(4), 429-450.
  • Saito, H. (2011). An actor-network theory of cosmopolitanism. Sociological Theory, 29(2), 124-149.
  • Sewell Jr, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1-29.
  • Singh, S. (2016). What Is Relational Structure? Introducing History to the Debates on the Relation between Fields and Social Networks. Sociological Theory, 34(2), 128-150.

Culture, Cognition, and Action

  • Abramson, C. M. (2012). From ‘either‐or’ to ‘when and how’: A context‐dependent model of culture in action. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 42(2), 155-180.
  • Alexander, J. C. (1988). Action and its Environments Pp. 301-333 in Action and its Environments: Toward a New Synthesis. Columbia University Press, New York.
  • Ayala Hurtado, E. (2022). Narrative continuity/rupture: Projected professional futures amid pervasive employment precarity. Work and Occupations, 49(1), 45-78.
  • Brett, G. (2022). Dueling with Dual-Process Models: Cognition, Creativity, and Context. Sociological Theory, 40(2), 179-201.
  • Eckstein, H. (1996). Culture as a foundation concept for the social sciences. Journal of Theoretical Politics, (4), 471-497.
  • Eliasoph, N., & Lichterman, P. (2003). Culture in interaction. American Journal of Sociology, 108(4), 735-794.
  • Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962-1023.
  • Emirbayer, M., & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology, 99(6), 1411-1454.
  • Freeman, K. J., Condron, D. J., & Steidl, C. R. (2020). Structures of stratification: Advancing a sociological debate over culture and resources. Critical Sociology, 46_(2), 191-206.
  • Haslanger, S. (2019). Cognition as a social skill. Australasian Philosophical Review, (1), 5-25.
  • Hays, S. (1994). Structure and agency and the sticky problem of culture. Sociological theory, 57-72.
  • Joas, H., & Knöbl, W. (2009). The Classical Attempt at Synthesis. Pp. 20-42 in Social Theory: Twenty Introductory Lectures. Cambridge University Press.
  • Leschziner, V., & Green, A. I. (2013). Thinking about Food and Sex Deliberate Cognition in the Routine Practices of a Field. Sociological Theory, 31(2), 116-144
  • Lizardo, O., & Strand, M. (2010). Skills, toolkits, contexts and institutions: Clarifying the relationship between different approaches to cognition in cultural sociology. Poetics, 38(2), 205-228.
  • Luft, A. (2020). Theorizing moral cognition: Culture in action, situations, and relationships. Socius, , 2378023120916125.
  • Luft, A. (2023). The moral career of the genocide perpetrator: Cognition, emotions, and dehumanization as a consequence, not a cause, of violence. Sociological Theory, 41(4), 324-351.
  • Miles, A. (2014). Addressing the problem of cultural anchoring an identity-based model of culture in action. Social Psychology Quarterly, 77(2), 210-227
  • Patterson, O. (2015). The nature and dynamics of cultural processes. In The cultural Matrix: Understanding Black Youth (pp. 25-44). Harvard University Press.
  • Reed, I. A., & Weinman, M. (2019). Agency, power, modernity: A manifesto for social theory. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, (1), 6-50.
  • Sendroiu, I. (2022). ‘All the old illusions’: on guessing at being in crisis. Sociological Theory, 40(4), 297-321.
  • Strand, M., & Lizardo, O. (2017). The hysteresis effect: Theorizing mismatch in action. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 47(2), 164-194.
  • Sewell, W. H. (2005). The concept(s) of culture. Pp. 152-174 in Logics of History. University of Chicago Press.
  • Spillman, L. (1995). Culture, social structures, and discursive fields. Current Perspectives in Social Theory, 15:129-154.
  • Silver, D. (2011). The moodiness of action. Sociological Theory, *29_(3), 199-222.
  • Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and Strategies. American Sociological Review, 51,:273–286.
  • Vaisey, S. (2009). Motivation and justification: Toward a dual-process theory of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology, 114(6):1675–1715.
  • Winchester, D. (2016). A hunger for God: embodied metaphor as cultural cognition in action. Social Forces, 95(2), 585-606.
  • Winchester, D., & Green, K. D. (2019). Talking your self into it: How and when accounts shape motivation for action. Sociological Theory, 37(3), 257-281.
  • Zilberstein, S., Lamont, M., & Sanchez, M. (2023). Recreating a Plausible Future: Combining Cultural Repertoires in Unsettled Times. Sociological Science, 10, 348-373.