Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite its enduring insights, Durkheim's theory of suicide fails to account for a significant set of cases because of its overreliance on structural forces to the detriment of other possible factors. In this paper, we develop a new theoretical framework for thinking about the role of culture in vulnerability to suicide. We argue that by focusing on the cultural dynamics of excessive regulation, particularly at the meso level, a more robust sociological model for suicide could be offered that supplements structure-heavy Durkheimian theory. In essence, we argue that the relevance of cultural regulation to suicide rests on the (1) degree to which culture is coherent in sociocultural places, (2) existence of directives related to prescribing or proscribing suicide, (3) degree to which these directives translate into internalized meanings affecting social psychological processes, and (4) degree to which the social space is bounded. We then illustrate how our new theory provides useful insights into three cases of suicide largely neglected within sociology: specifically, suicide clusters in high schools, suicide in the military, and suicides of \"despair\" among middle-aged white men. We conclude with implications for future sociological research on suicide and suicide prevention.

Research suggests that suicide can socially diffuse through social relationships and social contexts; however, little is known about the mechanisms that facilitate this diffusion. Using data from an in-depth case study of a cohesive community with an enduring youth suicide problem (N = 118), we examine how, after repeated exposure to suicide, the community’s cultural script for suicide may have been rekeyed such that suicide became a more imaginable option for some community youth. Essentially, we found evidence that a series of sudden, shocking, suicide deaths of high-status youth may have triggered the formation of new locally generalized meanings for suicide that became available, taken-for-granted social facts. The new meanings reinterpreted broadly shared adolescent experiences (exposure to pressure) as a cause of suicide facilitating youth’s ability to imagine suicide as something someone like them could do to escape. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for the scientific understanding of (1) suicide and suicide clusters, (2) social diffusion processes, and (3) suicide prevention.

Ready or not, American schools facing increasing rates of youth suicide must actively manage mental health crises and work to prevent suicide. Using insights from district-based fieldwork, we offer a sociological vision for building sustainable, equitable, and effective suicide prevention capacities across school communities.

This Handbook provides the hidden common threads that tie sociological inquiry together and featuring eminent scholars, it separates itself from its predecessors in substance and organization. Rather than rehashing old debates or longingly gazing at the past, this book presents sociologists with new ways of conceptualizing the organization and presentation of sociological theory. At the heart of this Handbook's vision is the twin goals of making theory a viable enterprise by reconceptualizing how we teach theory and keeping theory closely tied to its empirical applications. Three strategies are offered: (1) Elucidating how classic issues like integration or interaction are interrogated today; (2) Presenting a coherent vision of the social levels of reality that theorists work on such as communities, groups, and the self as well as how the coherence of these levels speaks to the macro-micro link; and, (3) Theorizing the social world rather than celebrating theorists or theories; that is, one can look at how theory is used holistically to understand the constraints the social world places on our lived experience or the dynamics of social change. Hence, in the second decade of the 21st century, it has become clear that sociology is at a crossroads as the number of theorists and amount of theory available is increasingly unmanageable and unknowable by the vast majority of professionals and students. As such, this Handbook of Contemporary Sociological Theory presents the novice and the expert with the a roadmap for traversing this crossroad and building a more coherent, robust, and cumulative sociology.

Though anomie is one of sociology’s most unique conceptual contributions, its progenitor, Emile Durkheim, was notably ambiguous about its meaning. Consequently, its use in contemporary sociology has varied wildly. In part, the confusion surrounding anomie stems from Durkheim’s insistence that it is caused by deregulation, which has resisted operationalization. Nevertheless, careful consideration of the “four faces” of anomie most prominent in the sociological canon—that is, (1) the anomic division of labor, (2) anomic suicide, (3) Mertonian strain, and (4) the micro-level symbolic-cultural versions—reveals that disruption and disintegration, rather than deregulation, are the common threads woven through each. Drawing from this insight, a new theoretical conceptualization for anomie is offered that defines it as (a) a social psychological force operating at both the (b) individual- or “meso”/corporate unit-level of social reality that results from (c) chronic or acute disruptions that, in turn, generate (d) real or imagined disintegrative pressures. Furthermore, disruptions are not only predicated on the real or imagined loss of social ties (dissolution), but also on the real or imagined loss of attachment to a coherent social reality (disjunction) and/or physical space (dislocation). This recalibration allows anomie to enter into deeper dialogue with a wide range of other phenomena that may in fact share some overlapping elements with anomie related to the pain of potentially losing cherished social relationships and the motivation toward self-harm, anti-social and even pro-social behaviors to escape this social pain. L’anomie a beau être l’une des contributions conceptuelles les plus caractéristiques de la sociologie, son créateur, Émile Durkheim, est resté notablement ambigu quant à sa signification. Par conséquent, son usage dans la sociologie contemporaine a évolué considérablement. La confusion entourant l’anomie découle pour partie de l’insistance de Durkheim sur le fait qu’elle serait causée par le dérèglement, ce qui n’a pu être véritablement opérationnalisé. Néanmoins, l’étude attentive des « quatre visages » de l’anomie qui occupent une place prépondérante dans la tradition sociologique – c’est-à-dire (1) la division anomique du travail, (2) le suicide anomique, (3) la tension Mertonienne et (4) les différentes versions symboliques et culturelles de niveau micro – révèle que la perturbation et l’absence d’intégration, plutôt que le dérèglement, constituent le fil conducteur de chacune d’elles. En s’inspirant de cette idée, cet article propose une nouvelle conceptualisation de l’anomie comme : (a) une force psycho-sociale agissant au niveau (b) de l’individu ou au niveau plus méso d’une unité collective de réalité sociale, et qui résulte (c) de perturbations chroniques ou aiguës qui, à leur tour, génèrent (d) des pressions désintégratrices réelles ou imaginaires. En outre, les perturbations ne sont pas uniquement liées à la perte réelle ou imaginaire de liens sociaux (dissolution), mais également à la perte réelle ou imaginaire d’attachement à une réalité sociale cohérente (disjonction) et/ou à un espace physique (dislocation). Ce recalibrage conceptuel permet à la notion d’anomie d’entretenir un dialogue plus approfondi avec un large éventail d’autres phénomènes, avec lesquels elle partage parfois certains éléments, liés à la douleur de perdre des relations sociales chères ou encore à la motivation, pour échapper à cette souffrance sociale, de se nuire à soi-même ou d’adopter des comportements antisociaux et même parfois pro-sociaux. Obgleich die Anomie zu einem der charakteristischsten konzeptuellen Beiträge der Soziologie zählt, war ihr Gründervater, Emile Durkheim, in Sachen Bedeutung mehr als doppeldeutig. Infolgedessen wird sie in der zeitgenössischen Soziologie ganz unterschiedlich genutzt. Die der Anomie anhaftende Konfusion geht zum Teil auf die Beharrlichkeit Durkheims zurück, der ihre Entstehung in der Deregulierung sieht, was nicht wirklich operativ bewiesen werden konnte. Nichtsdestotrotz zeigt eine aufmerksame Betrachtung der im soziologischen Kanon sehr bekannten “vier Seiten” der Anomie –1. die anomische Teilung der Arbeit, 2. der anomische Selbstmord, 3. die mertonische Spannung und 4. die verschiedenen symbolischen und kulturellen Varianten der Mikroebene – dass Störungen und mangelnde Integration, mehr als Deregulierung, den Leitfaden jeder einzelnen darstellen. Ausgehend von dieser Idee schlägt der Beitrag eine neue Konzeptualisierung der Anomie vor: a) eine psycho-soziale Kraft agiert b) auf dem Niveau des Individuums oder mehr auf der Mesoebene der sozialen Realität einer kollektiven Einheit, woraus sich c) chronische oder zugespitzte Störungen ergeben, die schließlich d) einen reellen oder erdachten desintegrierenden Druck ausüben. Darüberhinaus sind die Störungen nicht nur auf den reellen oder erdachten Verlust sozialer Netze (Auflösung), sondern auch auf den reellen oder erdachten Verlust von Verbindungen zu einer kohärenten sozialen Realität (Trennung) und/oder einem physischen Raum (Zerfall) zurückzuführen. Dieses konzeptuelle Austarieren ermöglicht es dem Anomiebegriff, einen tiefer gehenden Dialog mit einem breiten Spektrum anderer Phänomene einzugehen, die in Verbindung zu dem schmerzlichen Verlust der so wichtigen sozialen Beziehungen stehen oder zu der Motivation diesem sozialen Leiden zu entgehen, sich selbst zu schaden oder unsoziale und manchmal sogar pro-soziale Verhaltensweisen anzunehmen.

Sociologists have long argued that institutions like religion or the economy can become relatively distinct spheres that facilitate and constrain action, goal setting, and decision-making. But few empirical studies have looked closely at how institutions become relatively distinct cultural and structural domains. This paper examines how institutional entrepreneurs-in this case, Major League Baseball (MLB) sportswriters-build and sustain institutional boundaries by considering how they create a distinct cultural discourse that infuses baseball places, times, and events with culturally distinct meanings. Drawing from sportswriters' columns, documentaries, and monographs written on baseball I show that MLB entrepreneurs have developed and disseminated a discourse oriented around the generalized medium of sport exchange, interaction, and communication: competitiveness. Using these data, this article examines how baseball writing becomes quantified and embodied in tangible and intangible forms. Additionally, the paper draws on sport columns that illustrate how MLB entrepreneurs protect the autonomy of a sacred core (the Hall of Fame) from internal threats (gambling and performance-enhancing drugs) and external corruption (the influence of money). The paper ends with a discussion of implications for the applicability of the findings to other sports and institutional domains.

We provide a test of the thesis that Protestantism influenced the development of modern capitalism by using quantitative data from 1500 through 1870. Results show that during this period the percentage of a country's population that is Protestant is unrelated to both its level of per capita GDP and the average rate of its annual growth in per capita GDP. We conclude that the thesis that the Protestant ethic has been an important factor in the growth of modern capitalism is not supported.

Despite the profound impact Durkheim's Suicide has had on the social sciences, several enduring issues limit the utility of his insights. With this study, we offer a new Durkheimian framework for understanding suicide that addresses these problems. We seek to understand how high levels of integration and regulation may shape suicide in modern societies. We draw on an in-depth, qualitative case study (N = 110) of a cohesive community with a serious adolescent suicide problem to demonstrate the utility of our approach. Our case study illustrates how the lives of adolescents in this highly integrated community are intensely regulated by the local culture, which emphasizes academic achievement. Additionally, the town's cohesive social networks facilitate the spread of information, amplify the visibility of actions and attitudes, and increase the potential for swift sanctions. This combination of cultural and structural factors generates intense emotional reactions to the prospect of failure among adolescents and an unwillingness to seek psychological help for adolescents' mental health problems among both parents and youth. Ultimately, this case illustrates (1) how high levels of integration and regulation within a social group can render individuals vulnerable to suicide and (2) how sociological research can provide meaningful and unique insights into suicide prevention.

Durkheim argued that strong social relationships protect individuals from suicide. We posit, however, that strong social relationships also have the potential to increase individuals' vulnerability when they expose people to suicidality. Using three waves of data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, we evaluate whether new suicidal thoughts and attempts are in part responses to exposure to role models' suicide attempts, specifically friends and family. We find that role models' suicide attempts do in fact trigger new suicidal thoughts, and in some cases attempts, even after significant controls are introduced. Moreover, we find these effects fade with time, girls are more vulnerable to them than boys, and the relationship to the role model—for teenagers at least—matters. Friends appear to be more salient role models for both boys and girls. Our findings suggest that exposure to suicidal behaviors in significant others may teach individuals new ways to deal with emotional distress, namely by becoming suicidal. This reinforces the idea that the structure—and content—of social networks conditions their role in preventing suicidality. Social ties can be conduits of not just social support, but also antisocial behaviors, like suicidality.

Institutional differentiation has been one of the central concerns of sociology since the days of Auguste Comte. However, the overarching tendency among institutionalists such as Durkheim or Spencer has been to treat the process of differentiation from a macro, \"outside in\" perspective. Missing from this analysis is how institutional differentiation occurs from the \"inside out, \"or through the efforts and struggles of individual and corporate actors. Despite the recent efforts of the \"new institutionalism\" to fill in this gap, a closer look at the literature will uncover the fact that (1) it has tended to conflate macro-level institutions and meso-level organizations and (2) this has led to a taken for granted approach to institutional dynamics. This article seeks to develop a general theory of institutional autonomy; autonomy is a function of the degree to which specialized corporate units are structurally and symbolically independent of other corporate units. It is argued herein that the process by which these \"institutional entrepreneurs\" become independent can explain how institutions become differentiated from the \"inside out.\" Moreover, this article offers five dimensions that can be operationalized, measuring the degree to which institutions are autonomous.