English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Recent criticism of research on “class specific forms of socialization” is discussed and possible sociological approaches for a differentiation in this field are supported in contrast to a position of psychological reduct- ionism. It is argued, that speaking of “class specific socialization” (“schichtenspezifische Sozialisation”) cannot be justified unless structural differences in the constellation of socialisatory conditions in specific sociocultural milieus are empirically confirmed besides merely showing differences in the degree of learning opportunities. From a sample of 357 ten-year-old children data regarding social background, measured intelligence and school achievement are analyzed to explore possibilities for differentiation of the global relationships betweem these indicators. The five distinguished social classes are comparable in the external features of family structure and their local ecology. Differences between them regarding intelligence and school achievement of the children must, therefore, be explained on the basis of their present socio-economic conditions and subcultural traditions. Group differences of intelligence and school achievement can be identified and consistently ordered according to class hierarchy. But beyond these quantitative differences no qualitative differences in the profile of intelligence and school notes can be shown and likewise no class specific factorial structures of intelligence are existent. Only after parents have been classified according to occupational characteristics, profile differences can be detected, which serve to point out subcultural specific forms of intelligent behavior. Effects of subcultural traditions can be separated from effects of the actual socio-economic conditions, when one distinguishes within the social classes’ subgroups according to the consistency of class heritage of the families. These two complexes of causation have no simple additive effects, their relative contribution is further mediated by their contextual constellation in the social history of the family. Finally, it can be shown that the predictive power of single status indicators is not distributed according to their causal proximity to the socialization process. The status indicators have a differential relation to various factors of intelligence and school achievement with respect to the sex of the children. From that it can be infered that the influence of social structural conditions is differentially mediated by mechanisms of sex-role development and that the processes of socialization within the family should be explained in terms of their macro-structural contextuation.

zeitschrift für soziologie

Die sozialstrukturelle Einbettung von Sozialisationsprozessen: Empirische Ergebnisse zur Ausdifferenzierung des globalen Zusammenhangs von Schichtzugehörigkeit und gemessener Intelligenz sowie Schulerfolg / The social structural context of socialization: On the differentiation of the relations between class-affiliation, measured intelligence, and schoolachievement – Empirical findings