Social mobility: patterns, causes, and consequences

Social Mobility

INTRODUCTION and PURPOSE

In conducting any type of study, the researcher chooses his or her topic for a variety of reasons. In addition to personal interest, academic viability and applicability is also an important consideration for the choice of topic. According to Marshall and Rossman (p. 27), for example, qualitative research can generally be inspired by a sense of "curiosity," which is in turn inspired by observations of the world as related to existing theory about a phenomenon.

The purpose of this study is then to research the possibility of social mobility among various social classes. The question that is proposed for the purpose of this study is to investigate whether social mobility indeed exists, and if it does, to investigate factors that either facilitate or hinder such social mobility. The findings of the study are expected to either confirm or deny the elements revealed by the short-term study.

Effectiveness and appropriateness will be ensured by investigate three social classes from which the possibility of social mobility might or might not be possible. The classes will include low-income groups, the working class, and the middle class. Within these classes, various factors might limit or encourage social mobility. Among low-income groups, for example, gender roles, family responsibilities and closed social networks might act as hindering factors for social mobility. On the other hand, different kinds of social support may offer opportunities for persons from low-income groups to escape to a different social sector of society, as shown by Dominguez and Watkins (2003). The worker and middle classes, as explicated by Kaufman (2005) tend to face issues like family and peer group pressures to perform at a certain level of success.

The nature of the study also implies the presence of a variety of social issues at the heart of the possibility of social mobility. Issues such as gender roles, peer groups, and family obligations, as mentioned above, play a significant role in affecting social mobility for the individuals form different income groups. Low-income groups for example face challenges that often override individual ambition. Dominguez and Watkins (2003) mention the specific challenges faced by women from low-income groups, in the form of social networks, family obligations, and common expectations of women and their role in society.

Social networks can either act as inhibiting or encouraging factors in social mobility for this group. When made up of family and friends, social networks within this group generally tend to be localized and insular (Dominguez and Watkins, 2003, p. 111). This limits the opportunity for social interaction beyond the network, limits access to information and opportunity, and thus prevents persons belonging to it from upward social mobility. These networks have particular policies of their own, which limit the opportunity of women to make use of resources and opportunities to improve their social status.

On the other hand, the authors also note the possibility that social networks can act as an encouraging factor for social mobility (Dominguez and Watkins, 2003, p. 112). They may for example offer access to resources and opportunities that might otherwise not be available to the individual. Cross-class interactions may for example take place within social networks that span across wide geographical areas, hence providing access to information and opportunities for individuals.

Another type of social network that offers individuals from low-income groups the opportunity for mobility is institutional networks, where institutions provide support, advice and information to help individuals find access to opportunities for higher income and social mobility. A key factor is the heterogeneity, or lack thereof, in the social network.

The authors (p. 113) note that heterogeneous social networks tend to encourage diverse contacts with a variety of opportunities that could encourage social mobility. Homogeneous social networks among low-income groups, on the other hand, tend to promote maintaining the status quo for individuals in terms of both income, work, and opportunities for mobility. Indeed, homogeneous social networks use peer group pressure to ensure the maintenance of the current situation for the individuals involved.

The trust and support cultivated within such tightly-knit social networks, as the authors mention, can also be used as leverage for social control. Providing resources and assistance to its members, the obligation of recipients is then to reciprocate this help. This creates a circular network of obligation which encourages a static structure for all members involved. While this is materially beneficial in the short-term, it does not encourage attempts to improve individual lives in terms of higher income or job aspirations.

In this regard, the authors also distinguish between networks of social support and those of social leverage (p. 113). Social support is offered by tightly knit, generally homogeneous networks. These offer support in terms of resources and mutual trust, but do not generally encourage social mobility. On the other hand, more heterogeneous and geographically extensive social networks tend to offer leverage, where individuals have access to more contact with the world outside of their personal income group. Such networks encourage aspirations towards better work and income possibilities.

Dominguez and Watkins therefore appear to suggest the possibility of social mobility for the low-income group, but under certain conditions. According to the authors, it appears that the major inhibiting or indeed encouraging factor is social networks; the type of community of which individuals enjoy membership will dictate whether social mobility will be a possibility for them or not.

2) MIDDLE CLASS SOCIAL REPRODUCTION

Marshall and Rossman (p. 34) suggest that a study of social issues, such as social mobility, has an interest across various sectors of society because these affect the everyday lives of people. The study can therefore contribute to an understanding of the social dynamic of mobility, and how this can be useful for individuals and social groups in fulfilling their aspirations while ensuring that they are usefully contributing members to society.

The article by Kaufman (2005) then address the worker- and middle-class income groups. The author suggests that many of the factors influencing the mobility of these groups are similar across the two sectors, while other factors are particular to each respective group. Kaufman appears to suggest that members of the worker and middle classes tend to adhere to what he refers to as "social reproduction" rather than social mobility. Social reproduction, according to the author, refers to members of a social class remaining within that class throughout the generations -- each generation in effect reproduces the income sector of its predecessors. This contrasts with Dominguez and Watkins, who suggest a more or less equal possibility of mobility or reproduction among low-income groups.

According to Kaufman, many complex factors influence the social reproduction of the working and middle classes. The author also notes that most research conducted in the field is primarily qualitative and focused upon the working class. Kaufman's contribution is then to build upon the existing research involving the working class while addressing the same issues for the middle class.

One suggestion that Kaufman (2005, p. 246) forwards is that middle-class reproduction is rather the result of a tendency towards a passive acceptance of the structurally advantageous social position than of active negotiation, construction, or indeed of contestation. Furthermore, there is a tendency among the young within this class to succumb to the actions of those around them prior to making their own conscious choices and decisions regarding career or mobility choices.

Another set of authors however suggest a more active role. Even if they do reproduce without contestation, middle-class young people must actively engage in using their structural resources to ensure such reproduction. It is not simply given to them as a result of being a member of that class. In other words, the young generation must engage in appropriate actions such as studying, searching for a job, and performing reasonably well at that job to ensure their remaining position in the middle class.

It is however also true, as Kaufman suggests, that there is a singular lack of ambition towards more than the middle-class position. In terms of ambition, the exposure of the young to the worlds of their parents and peers tend to exclude an awareness of something "more" or "better" than what they know. Much the same as with the low-income group mentioned above, this relatively homogeneous social circle tends to preclude the possibility of anything else than the known world of income possibilities. At the same time, the relatively privileged social position of the middle class in itself tends to preclude even the desire for more than what is available for members of this community.

One important social question that Kaufman (p. 247) addresses is why the social reproduction phenomenon among the middle classes has not received much attention from the academic world. Some have suggested that, for the middle classes, social reproduction is more or less taken for granted -- it is an "unmarked" social phenomenon. In other words, social reproduction within this group is accepted as the norm, and the assumption is that any attempt at research would simply prove the norm.

Kaufman's purpose therefore becomes one of proving the active, constructive and negotiated nature of social reproduction in the middle class, rather than what is assumed -- its structural determination. The author goes about this by building upon the existing literature on working-class social reproduction. He identifies three themes that encourage social class transfer among the generations; these include resistance and contestation; the peer group; and the structural location of the family (Kaufman, 2005, p. 251). Kaufman then applies these to the middle class in order to arrive at his findings.

Interestingly, the author finds that, while middle-class young people do engage in resistance and rejection, this occurs in a manner that promotes reproduction (Kaufman, p. 252). While the young often reject their parents' desires for their professional careers, they nonetheless proceed to choose careers that would ensure their remaining social position by also rejecting non-professional careers. For the author, this indicates a need to actively pursue a career within their social class, which indicates a more conscious choice than many researchers appear to account for.

Kaufman also finds that peer group loyalty is as applicable to the middle class as the working class (p. 258). Middle-class young people are as dependent upon peer group interactions as their working class counterparts. Hence, the greatest likelihood is that careers would be chosen that would perpetuate peer group ties.