Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v.v.i.

O titulu

Kontakt

Redakční rada

Texty

Prodej, distribuce, objednávka

2008:4 Social Distances and Stratification: Social Space in the Czech Republic

Jiří Šafr, Julia Häuberer (eds.), Marta Kolářová, Kateřina Vojtíšková

This volume pursues how the symbolic boundaries contribute to social hierarchies in the stratification space. First, relational notion of inequalities is introduced: a culturalistic approach to class analysis and concepts of social distance. The next three chapters study subjective distance, i.e. interactional willingness related to 22 occupations as researched through the population survey Social Distances 2007. The third chapter focuses on how the mechanisms of closeness (like-me) and looking up (prestige) work to form distance. Prestige is by far the more prevalent; the like-me mechanism only applies slightly among professionals and unskilled workers. Class feelings are expressed only minimally, mostly by the working class. Next chapter examines the existence of subjectively experienced classes. There is a dominant status continuum. Further, four clusters of subjectively perceived classes were found: high professionals, traditionally female lower professionals, semi-skilled manual and routine non-manual workers, and unskilled workers with low prestige. The fifth chapter deals with objective social distance in terms of actual patterns of association in egocentric networks (respondent’s three best friends). Here, the homophily (like-me) is very strong. Associations among 25 occupational categories are ordered primarily along a status continuum, with a distinct gap between white and blue collar.

The volume next explores stratification beliefs and perceptions of inequalities. The sixth chapter is concerned with people’s images of social classes and the attribution of traits to various strata. People with lower status understand class in terms of economic factors, whereas those with higher status define it in terms of cultural factors. The following chapters pursue results from a qualitative study focused on the perception of inequalities. The seventh chapter introduces a description of what the concept of class evokes and what criteria people may employ in understanding social class. Narrators mostly reject the term ‘class’ as such, due to its strong Marxian overtones. The eighth chapter examines lay conceptions and ethno-theories of stratification focused on social categories understood as ‘those above’ and ‘those below’. In assigning a position in the symbolic space, two dimensions are decisive: the material power hierarchy and a person’s symbolic position within society (recognition). In general terms, both studies reveal that corporate class-consciousness (i.e., closed-group solidarity) is not present. Contemporary Czech society may be better described in terms of competitive status feeling, with values of competitiveness on the basis of individual merit. Yet, this is cast into doubt by a widespread impression of undeserved wealth that emerged during the post-communist transition in some striking cases.

Keywords

social stratification, social distance, social interaction, social class, symbolic social space, group identity, social categorization

Summary

The objective of this volume is to explore the symbolic boundaries that contribute to social hierarchies in the symbolic stratification space. Generally, the question of class or status identity formation is addressed through social interaction. The first chapter provides a theoretical introduction to the relational notion of inequality. A culturalistic approach to class analysis-focusing on how cultural practices contribute to the origin of symbolic boundaries and a view of classes as empirical clusters-is introduced, along with a review of different concepts and definitions of social distance. Of special interest is the interactional conception of social distance, in terms of affinity (subjective distance) and different patterns of associations, such as friendship (objective distance) [Laumann 1966].

The next three chapters study subjective social distance, i.e. interactional willingness related to given occupational stimuli, as researched through the population-representative survey Social Distances 2007. In the second chapter, the use and descriptive statistics of a subjective social-distance scales towards 22 occupations is introduced, together with a comparison with other stratification scales (ISEI, SIOPS) and with an evaluation of the usefulness to society of the same set of professions indicating both scales are measuring slightly different aspects. The analysis also finds that the scales of subjective distance are not significantly influenced by either the gender of the respondent or the gender characteristics of the target occupation.

The third chapter focuses on how distinct mechanisms-closeness (like-me) and looking up (prestige)-work to form social distances. The prestige effect is by far the more prevalent (nearly three times stronger). The like-me effect applies only to a limited extent, mainly among the most distinctive social classes of professionals and unskilled workers. So it is impossible to speak of any clear in-group/out-group class favouritism or deprecation that would maintain a firm interclass symbolic boundary. In addition, subjective social distance is an expression of class beliefs. Results of interclass differences (EGP) point to the presence of status sentiment rather than explicit class-consciousness. Only some very slight class feelings are expressed consistently with attitudes about social stratification, mostly by working-class respondents.

The fourth chapter examines the existence of subjectively experienced classes. Matrix of similarity between pairs of occupational stimuli was in the first step transferred to a two-dimensional space. The prestige effect points to a dominant status continuum, in which there is a boundary between blue- and white-collar occupations. Furthermore, occupational stimuli were first clustered into seven groupings. Among these, the highest (high experts) and lowest (unskilled workers) can be considered as distinct subjectively perceived classes. Yet, some subgroups should be regarded as situses. Finally, occupations were grouped into four subjective classes: high professionals, lower professionals in fields dominated by women (pink-collars), skilled or semi-skilled manual and routine non-manual workers, and unskilled workers with low prestige.

The fifth chapter deals with objective social distance in terms of actual patterns of association in egocentric social networks (respondent’s three best friends). The homophily, or like-me, effect is very strong and persistent over time in determining friendship: About one half of Czechs have a best friend of the same class or with same educational level. Moreover, one quarter of friendship networks (ego and three best friends), comprise a class-homogeneous environment. Furthermore, analysis of the association among 25 occupational categories, employing multidimensional scaling of a proximity matrix of friendship pairs, showed that interactional patterns are ordered primarily along a status continuum, supplemented with a dimension of gender characteristics, with a distinct gap between white and blue collar.

The volume next explores stratification beliefs and perceptions of inequalities. The sixth chapter is concerned with people’s images of social classes and the attribution of traits to various strata. People with lower status understand class in terms of objective economic factors (wealth, income, profession), whereas those with higher status define it chiefly in terms of cultural factors (education, social standing, lifestyle). Concerning trait attribution (laziness, ignorance, selfishness, irresponsibility), no hostility was found toward either the upper strata or the benefits recipients
(underclass). Generally, only members of the upper class and the lower or working class view themselves relatively better than do other classes.

This issue is pursued in greater detail in the following part, using narrative data from a qualitative study focused on the perception of inequalities. In-depth interviews were conducted with thirty men and women, with various educational backgrounds and social statuses, living in Prague or Liberec. The seventh chapter introduces a description of what the concept of class evokes and what criteria people employ in understanding social class. Narrators of higher
status reject the term ‘class’ as such, because of their sense of its strong Marxian overtones. However, they do not hesitate to group themselves in specific strata. Most respondents see themselves as belonging to the middle strata or class. This demonstrates the existence of status sentiments in the form of membership in the middle strata, as well as the absence of concrete class boundaries.

The eighth chapter examines lay conceptions and ethno-theories of social stratification, focused more generally on non-a priori social categories and not necessarily in terms of labour market position, understood as ‘those above’ and ‘those below’. These concepts often combine a number of criteria, such as ethnicity, gender, wealth, societal usefulness, morality. Most narrators maintain an identity of ordinary, middle class people. When assigning other people to a position in the symbolic space, two dimensions are decisive: the material and power hierarchy and a person’s symbolic position within society (recognition). Perceived inconsistency of these dimensions is assumed to
be illegitimate.

In general terms, both studies reveal that substantial corporate class-consciousness is not present. Contemporary Czech society may be better described in terms of competitive status feeling, with values of competitiveness inherent to all strata/classes and a widespread awareness of the permeability of the stratification system based on individual merit. Yet, this is cast into doubt by a widespread impression of undeserved wealth that emerged during the post-communist transition in some striking cases.