IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v22y2017i4p132-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Tale of Two Sociologies: Analyzing Versus Critique in UK Sociology

Author

Listed:
  • Malcolm Williams

    (Cardiff University, UK)

  • Luke Sloan

    (Cardiff University, UK)

  • Charlotte Brookfield

    (Cardiff University, UK)

Abstract

Several studies, in recent years, have demonstrated what has become known as the ‘quantitative deficit’ in UK sociology. This deficit is primarily manifested through negative student attitudes towards quantitative methods, a lack of ability in that area and a paucity of quantitative research and publication in the discipline that utilises quantitative methods. While we acknowledge the existence of that deficit, we argue in this article, and present some initial evidence in support of this argument, that the issue is not simply just about a ‘crisis of number’ but the kind of sociology taught and practised in the United Kingdom. We suggest here that there are two broad categories of sociology that do not necessarily divide along quantitative–qualitative lines, which we term ‘analytic’ and ‘critique’. Much of UK sociology takes a ‘critique’ approach, which may well be a quite legitimate way to do sociology, but is not a sufficient basis on which quantitative sociology can be done and has implications for the future of the discipline.

Suggested Citation

  • Malcolm Williams & Luke Sloan & Charlotte Brookfield, 2017. "A Tale of Two Sociologies: Analyzing Versus Critique in UK Sociology," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 22(4), pages 132-151, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:22:y:2017:i:4:p:132-151
    DOI: 10.1177/1360780417734146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1360780417734146
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1360780417734146?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Eldridge, 2011. "Half-Remembrance of Things Past: Critics and Cuts of Old," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 16(3), pages 149-153, August.
    2. John Scott, 2005. "Sociology and Its Others: Reflections on Disciplinary Specialisation and Fragmentation," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 10(1), pages 71-78, June.
    3. Kincaid,Harold, 1996. "Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521482684, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kevin Ralston, 2020. "‘Sociologists Shouldn’t Have to Study Statistics’: Epistemology and Anxiety of Statistics in Sociology Students," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 25(2), pages 219-235, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marchionni, Caterina & Reijula, Samuli, 2018. "What is mechanistic evidence, and why do we need it for evidence-based policy?," SocArXiv 4ufbm, Center for Open Science.
    2. Clive Beed & Cara Beed, 1999. "Intellectual Progress and Academic Economics: Rational Choice and Game Theory," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 163-185, December.
    3. Raina, Rajeswari S., 2003. "Disciplines, institutions and organizations: impact assessments in context," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 185-211, November.
    4. Timothy M. Devinney & Jan Hohberger, 2017. "The past is prologue: Moving on from Culture’s Consequences," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(1), pages 48-62, January.
    5. John Urry, 2005. "Beyond the Science of ‘Society’," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 10(2), pages 78-80, July.
    6. Łukasz Hard, 2014. "Models of Mechanisms and their Role in Building Economic Explanations," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 37.
    7. Donald W. Katzner, 2015. "A Neoclassical Curmudgeon Looks at Heterodox Criticisms of Microeconomics," World Economic Review, World Economics Association, vol. 2015(4), pages 1-63, February.
    8. Tomas Hellström, 2008. "Transferability and Naturalistic Generalization: New Generalizability Concepts for Social Science or Old Wine in New Bottles?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 321-337, June.
    9. David Kihangire, 2005. "The Effects Of Exchange Rate Variability On Exports: Evidence From Uganda (1988 – 2001)," International Trade 0505013, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Marc Orlitzky, 2011. "Institutionalized dualism: statistical significance testing as myth and ceremony," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 47-77, September.
    11. Steven Rappaport, 1996. "Abstraction and unrealistic assumptions in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 215-236.
    12. Alejandro Portes, 2008. "Migration and Social Change: Some Conceptual Reflections," Working Papers 1096, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Migration and Development..
    13. Reinhard Neck, 2021. "Methodological Individualism: Still a Useful Methodology for the Social Sciences?," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 49(4), pages 349-361, December.
    14. Benet Davetian, 2005. "Towards an Emotionally Conscious Social Theory," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 10(2), pages 81-95, July.
    15. John Scott, 2005. "Fallacies in the Critique of Disciplinary Sociology," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 10(3), pages 139-144, November.
    16. Jesus Felipe & John S.L. McCombie, 2013. "The Aggregate Production Function and the Measurement of Technical Change," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1975.
    17. Khan, Amna & Lindridge, Andrew & Pusaksrikit, Theeranuch, 2018. "Why some South Asian Muslims celebrate Christmas: Introducing ‘acculturation trade-offs’," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 290-299.
    18. Clive Beed & Cara Beed, 1997. "Realism and a Christian Perspective on Economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 313-333.
    19. Rick Szostak, 2008. "Classifying Heterodoxy," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 97-126, March.
    20. Matthew Longshore Smith & Carolina Seward, 2009. "The Relational Ontology of Amartya Sen's Capability Approach: Incorporating Social and Individual Causes," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 213-235.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:22:y:2017:i:4:p:132-151. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.