A Comparative Analysis of Subjective Social Class: 1945'1963

Abstract

This study compares data from the Centers' study (1945) with another national sample study done in 1963. variables used are: social class, occupation, education, and age. results show a reduction in the use of the working-class label. meaning of subjective social is questioned. An explanation for the statistical relationships, consistent with the redefinition of social class, is presented. Suggestions for future research in line with this explanation are recommended. R ecently the issue of subjective social was revived in the sociological literature. It was shown by Hamilton that over half of the white-collar workers designated themselves with the working-class label in 1956.1 Tucker, with data from a study done in 1963, showed that only 18 percent of these workers chose the working-class label.2 This study can be viewed as a continued effort to solve this problem. problem implied in the disagreement revolves around the question: Do Americans still label themselves working class as previous studies indicate ?3 Put in this manner the question does not solve the methodological and theoretical problems which have appeared in the literature regarding social class.4 * data for this study were analyzed as part of another study: See Charles W. Tucker, Jr., Occupational Evaluation and Self-Identification, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. original study is discussed in Charles P. Loomis, Zona K. Loomis, and Jeanne E. Gullahorn, Linkages of MAexico and the Uniited States (East Lansing: Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Bulletin 14, 1966), paper read at the annual meeting of the Southern Sociological Society, Atlanta, Georgia, March 1967. 1 R. F. Hamilton, The Marginal Middle Class, A-nerican Sociological Reviezw, 31 (April 1966), pp. 192-199. 2 Charles W. Tucker, Jr., On Working-Class Identification, Americat Sociological Reviewe, 31 (December 1966), pp. 855-856. 3 main study under consideration is: Richard Centers, Psychology of Social Classes (New York: Russell & Russell, 1961). 4The major criticisms can be found-in: H. M. Hodges, Social Stratification (Cambridge: SchenkThis content downloaded from 207.46.13.131 on Sun, 16 Oct 2016 05:32:23 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms SUBJECTIVE SOCIAL CLASS 509 Most of these issues will not be of concern