The Career of Status Crystallization: A Sociological Odyssey

Since it was first introduced half a century ago, Status Crystallization [SC] which is also know as Status Incongruence, Consistency or Inconsistency has been used in over 200 research papers. Many have accepted it and treated it as a potentially useful substantive construct and even generalized it somewhat. A few have tried to forge theoretical links between it and such related concepts as socialization and mobility. A third group has taken a more combative approach and declared it either theoretically vacuous or empirically irrelevant. Much of the debate is apparently a failed attempt at communication between the innumerate and the a- theoretical. This paper evaluates both of these tendencies through the examination of a selection of contributions to the debate. The conclusions reached include, first, that SC has never been appropriately measured or tested so that any claims regarding its efficacy are premature and second that a coherent sociological paradigm must have a place for SC in it. Any sociological theory which cannot provide a meaningful place for SC is deemed too restricted to be of any lasting interest. From this second point the paper addresses the role that operationalization and empirical research play in the formulation and refinement of social theories and the need for social theorists to become more methodologically astute. Building on insights derived from recent developments in chaos theory, the paper concludes with a general discussion of SC as a dynamic concept best modelled with differential equations.