Abstract
Surveys of social and political issues using Agorametrie methodology drawn from widely different social environments have revealed consistent two-dimensional, factor-analytic solutions. Rukavishnikov and van Meter refer to the first dimension as “modern-radical/traditional-conservative” and “openness/closedness”; the second, as “frustration/satisfaction” and “emotional/non-emotional”. These distinctions are critically evaluated and an alternative interpretation is proposed. Two sociorelational dimensions are drawn from Douglas’s Grid-Group Theory, interpreted as two pairs of opposite social-relations models of Fiske-Haslam-Bolender Relational Models Theory. Accordingly, the Group emphasizes communal-sharing (CS) as opposed to market-pricing (MP); the Grid, authority-ranking (AR) as opposed to equality-matching (EM). Affect-Spectrum Theory links valenced, secondary-level emotions to quadrants of the Grid-Group space, with quadrants characterized by sets of secondary-level emotions. Van Meter’s hypothesis that the two-dimensional survey results suggest two kinds of human societies, the “cooperative” and the “hierarchical” is reasonable, but it is proposed that the sociorelational bases of these societal types are the complementarities between CS and EM, and between AR and MP. Neurosociological implications of the data and theorizing are discussed.
Highlights
We present an alternative interpretation of these two axes, based on a partial synthesis of three social theories, Grid-Group Theory (Douglas, [1970] 2003: pp: 64-106; Gross & Rayner, 1985), Relational-Models Theory (RMT) (Fiske, 1991, 2004; Haslam, 1994a, 1994b; Bolender, 2010), and Affect-Spectrum Theory (TenHouten, 2007, 2013, 2017b)
AR—EM and CS—MP dimensions inferred to correspond to the grid-group distinction, together with propositions from affect-spectrum theory, suggest that both positive, mixed, and negative emotions can be found within all four quadrants
From the emotions classification provided by affect-spectrum theory, we infer the emotions most directly involved in social relations
Summary
TenHouten gram of research conducted by the Parisian association of administrations and companies Agoramétrie (1987, 1998) suggests a possible two-dimensional structure underlying the sociocognitive organization of social groups or societies The naming of these two “factors” differs considerably, and their justification in terms of the placement of questionnaire-item responses in this factor-analytic space is based on thin evidence. This paper, in offering a theoretical interpretation of these two-factor solutions, proposes that both axes contain not one but two dimensions. We hypothesize that both axes are formed from a polarity of opposite sociorelational models. Before presenting this theoretical conceptualization, we discuss and evaluate existing interpretations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
