Prelims

The recent worldwide resurgence of militant nationalism, fundamentalist intolerance, and right-wing authoritarianism has again put the issues of violence and xenophobia at the center of social science research and theory. German psychoanalyst and sociologist Erich Fromm's work provides a useful theoretical microfoundation for contemporary work on nationalism, the politics of identity, and the roots of war and violence. Fromm's analysis of Nazism in «Escape from Freedom» (1941), in particular, outlines a compelling theory of irrationality, and his later writings on nationalism provide an existential psychoanalysis that can be useful for contemporary social theory and sociology of emotions. «Escape from Freedom» synthesizes Marxist, Freudian, Weberian, and existentialist insights to offer an original theoretical explanation of Nazism that combines both macrostructural and micropsychological levels of analysis. After forty-five years of research into the social origins of fascism and with recent theorizing in the sociology of nationalism and emotions, «Escape from Freedom», its analysis of Nazism, and Fromm's larger theoretical perspective are worth reconsidering

The sociology of emotions and the sociology of science arose concurrently (circa 1975-present), but connections between these subfields have been rare. Existing research pleads for greater integration and contextualization. This chapter synthesizes and critically assesses eight decades of research on emotional aspects of science. Taken together, extant literature indicates that emotions pervade science as a practice, profession and social institution. Emotions support the ability to perceive and observe empirical patterns and relationships, and to make specific types of knowledge claims. They are elemental facets of scientists’ career evaluations and work life, and their influence on the research process informs and consequentially impacts the form and content of scientific knowledge. Collective emotional states and affective relationships are also essential for scientific collaboration and for fomenting large-scale collective action in the form of scientific social movements. Finally, emotions gave original impetus to science as a distinctive social institution, and continue to support it by acting as agents of social control in the scientific community. Overall, research on emotions and science is rapidly emerging as a generative area of research in its own right, and has the potential to significantly advance general sociology.

The paper aims to discuss the materials and outcomes of recently conducted research dealing with an analysis of the similarities and differences in current sociological theories exploring social inter-connection phenomena. The authors translate the term “obschenie”employed in Russian literature as “social intercourse”. Four basic theoretical constructions are under scrutiny, those being Anne Rawls’ interaction order theory, Randall Collins’ interaction ritual chains theory, Jeffrey Alexander’s theory of social performance, and Jonathan Turner’s theory of interpersonal behavior. The paper’s point of departure is an idea that there is a line ascending from the sociological theory of human interactions to the tradition represented in social science by Durkheim and Goffman. The discussion opens with an attempt to depict and classify the realities of “social intercourse” occurrences, followed with an assessment of its basic characteristics. Having displayed analytical and conceptual problems that the phenomenon “social intercourse” generates for sociological theory, the paper turns to a comparative analysis of the four noted theoretical interpretations of interaction in society. The outcomes of such an analysis drive authors to present and explore the research dilemmas that configure current theoretical sociological analysis of “social intercourse”. The closing part of the paper delineates the relations between the sociology of “social intercourse” with the sociology of everyday life and the sociology of emotions.

All social relations involve emotional responses, from the simplest face-to-face encounter through the mobilization of social movements to the commitments that individuals develop for culture and society. The social world is thus dependent upon the arousal of emotions, and equally significant conflict and change in societies is ultimately driven by emotional arousal. Thus, it is important to understand how human emotions influence, and are influenced by, the social world. This understanding takes us into the sociology of emotions that has emerged as a distinct area of inquiry over the last thirty years.

The past 20 years have seen dramatic rises in suicide rates in the United States and other countries around the world. These trends have been identified as a public health crisis in urgent need of new solutions and have spurred significant research efforts to improve our understanding of suicide and strategies to prevent it. Unfortunately, despite making significant contributions to the founding of suicidology – through Emile Durkheim’s classic Suicide (1897/1951) – sociology’s role has been less prominent in contemporary efforts to address these tragic trends, though as we will show, sociological theories offer great promise for advancing our understanding of suicide and improving the efficacy of suicide prevention. Here, we review sociological theory and empirical research on suicide. We begin where all sociologists must: with Durkheim. However, we offer a more comprehensive understanding of Durkheim’s insights into suicide than the prior reviews provided by those in other disciplines. In so doing, we reveal the nuance and richness of Durkheim’s insights that have been largely lost in modern suicidology, despite being foundational to all sociological theories of suicide – even those that have moved beyond his model. We proceed to discuss broadly acknowledged limitations to Durkheim’s theory of suicide and review how more recent theoretical efforts have not only addressed those concerns, but have done so by bringing a larger swatch of sociology’s theoretical and empirical toolkit to bare on suicide. Specifically, we review how recent sociological theories of suicide have incorporated insights from social network theories, cultural sociology, sociology of emotions, and sociological social psychology to better theorize how the external social world matters to individual psychological pain and suffering. We conclude by making explicit bridges between sociological and psychological theories of suicide; by noting important limitations in knowledge about suicide – particularly regarding the roles of organizations, inequality, and intersectionality in suicide – that sociology is well situated to help address.

In this chapter, we selectively review the contributions of three traditions to sociology of emotions – dramaturgy, symbolic interactionism, and group processes. In summarizing the key contributions of these literatures, we highlight possible areas for theory development and integration across the three traditions. Drawing on recent studies of the relationships between emotion and differences in social position, we focus on status and power as common ground. After reviewing the contributions to sociology of emotion by the emotion management, identity theory, affect control theory, social exchange theory, and justice/equity theory literatures, we address the lack of clarity and shared language across traditions as critical obstacles to theory development in the sociology of emotions.

The objective of this article is to illustrate the close relationship between the thought of Randall Collins - well-known in Italy for his manuals, less so for his more innovative works - and the sociology of emotions. The publication of his book Conflict Sociology (1975) was one of the most significant episodes in the emergence of this field of study towards the end of the 1970s. More importantly, though, Collins’ interaction ritual theory is inextricably linked to the emotions: his "ritual theory of emotions" is an integral part of IR theory and has become the theory of reference for what now constitutes an autonomous sociological approach to the emotions. Collins may be reproached for configuring the social actor as overly emotional, but obviously this is also a merit, if one considers for how long sociological theory was characterised by the primacy of normative and rational actors.

Competitive reality television is a pervasive part of contemporary American culture and encompasses a range of topics and forms. We identify three categories, or spheres, of contestant-elimination reality shows: External Vote, Internal Vote, and Choosing Individual/Deity. Within each sphere, we examine the locus of blame and the structure of the show as contexts for the elimination as symbolic death. This symbolic death presents allegories of loss of fame, social isolation, and individual loss of job, career, or love across these spheres. Contestants perform eulogy work to cope publicly with their elimination at the moment of exit. Eulogy work enables departing contestants to frame their “death” as a good death and to “cool themselves out” in an attempt to save face. In this way, contestants deal with conceptions of self in the show and the transfer of that self back to a reality outside of the bracketed time and space of the show. Drawing on literature from the sociology of emotions, the sociology of death, and the sociology of ritual, we provide the concept of eulogy work to capture the performance of the self specifically in the context of loss.

In everyday life as well as in scientific discourses, ageing as a social process is often associated with the highly affective term of loss—e.g. of autonomy, choice, self-efficacy, social networks, or physical losses—and, therefore, age and ageing are commonly linked to emotions and affects such as grief or anger. Even though loss in older age might be an emotional experience, sociological theories of ageing rarely consider emotional and affective dimensions of ageing processes in their theoretical and conceptual thinking. We propose to link ageing with the theoretical concepts of emotional capitalism and emodities (Illouz 2007, 2017) as an example for the sociology of emotions, and resonance (Rosa 2019) as an example of affect studies. By applying these theoretical lenses to the field of ageing research, we aim to get a deeper understanding of how ageing and the losses associated with it appear through the lenses of the sociology of emotions and affect studies. Additionally, we link those perspectives to gerontological approaches and highlight how they might be enriched by including concepts that explicitly deal with emotions and affect. Through this reflexive exploration, we seek to renegotiate how the understanding of ageing in the social sciences is characterised by preconceptions about the associated emotional and affective processes, and we highlight the potential of theoretically sensitising existing gerontological perspectives with insights from the sociology of emotions and affect studies.

K. Wahlbeck provides a range of cogent arguments supporting the view that the natural perspective for mental health is in the realm of public health. In reality, however, the perspective of public health is not dominant in academic psychiatry or in the way mental health services are organized. The dominant model in academic psychiatry is embedded in an individual-level perspective of brain disease, although there is considerable debate as to how successful this dominant approach has been 1. A student wanting to find out about psychiatry may get the impression that two languages are spoken in mental health: a public health one, taking into account the natural perspectives of high prevalence, graded trajectories from health to illness, social determinants, empowerment and self-determination, resilience, positive mental health and prevention; and a biomedical one, focusing on illness and diagnostic labels, brain disease, animal research, genetic liability, biological determinants and pharmacological interventions. The existence of two languages in mental health research is one of the explanations of the limited crosstalk between areas distributed over the public health and natural sciences, even though the application of scientific paradigms to mental health research, including those derived from neuroscience, psychiatry, public health, epidemiology, social science, sociology, psychology and philosophy, has expanded exponentially. In other words, research in mental health has expanded exponentially, but in widely different directions, showing signs of increasing fragmentation rather than integration. If natural science and public health are to join forces, this will have to be at the level of research endeavours in which the results are interpreted on the basis of a common language. There are some pointers as to which elements may be used to construct a common language. First, research in public health highlights powerful effects of the social environment on onset and persistence of syndromes of mental ill-health, the existence of vulnerable and resilient subgroups, and possible cognitive, neural and behavioural mediation of environmental effects. Second, research in psychology and psychiatry indicates that most mental disorders as defined in DSM and ICD represent quantitative deviation from health. Third, research in basic population genetics highlights the importance of (epi)genetic variation in terms of short-term and long-term adaptation to the social environment. Fourth, research in social neuroscience is highlighting the role of the brain in enabling man to navigate the social world and is building models of the way in which our current context – which includes both the social environment and our internal states and traits – impacts on how we attach meaning to social cues. There is increasing interest in the role of culture in these processes, for example how cultural variation may impact on social cognition and the process of empowerment in relation to one's circumstances. The above four elements indicate that genetic variation and neural processes form the biological roots of human sociality, resulting in the mutual constitution of cultures and selves; they also suggest that health and illness result from complex interactions between the physical, cultural, and social environments. Thus, a common theme emerges linking deviation from mental health, genetic variation and neural function, which can be formulated as dynamic adaptation to the individual-level and wider social environment. Dynamic adaptation to the environment may constitute a point of entry towards a common language in mental health research, linking social and natural sciences. However, this perspective contrasts with the current practice of research in biological psychiatry, which typically involves comparisons between a group of severely ill patients constrained by DSM or ICD criteria of disorder, and healthy, or "super-healthy", controls on static measures of, for example, allelic frequency or cortical thickness. In other words, the role of genetic and neural variables in dynamic adaptation to the social world, including at the level of intentionality and meaning, is typically not taken into account. Public health approaches in mental health research can be introduced focusing on genetics, neuroimaging and animal models, using the perspective of dynamic adaptation to the environment. For example, what potentially links the different approaches in mental health research is the level at which social and cultural influences are studied, and how these might interact with each other. Public health research is of particular interest in the area of how the wider social environment may impact on risk for and resilience against mental disorders. Examples of such contextual variables are social cohesion and trust, social capital, social integration, ethnic density, population density, social divide or social inequality. Research has shown that these types of contextual variables are strongly associated with mental outcomes (risk and resilience), and interact with individual-level characteristics (e.g., individual-level ethnic group and ethnic density). As there is a paucity in cross-discipline approaches, this type of research has yielded little in terms of causality, biological and psychological mediators and moderators, and developmental pathways. It is reasonable to assume that the impact of the wider social environment will be mediated by individual-level cognitive and (cross-species) biological factors and that it will be moderated by the same factors. It is clear that a rich potential exists for collaboration between public health scientists on the one hand, and mental health and neuroscience researchers on the other. While it may be attractive to align cross-species behavioural research paradigms, resulting in a multilevel perspective on underlying neural mechanisms, there is an additional need to co-align and co-evaluate this work with "mental" paradigms, for example from experimental psychology. A good starting point to bring together research on behavioural, neural and cognitive mechanisms around a single paradigm is to study the impact of a certain environmental exposure (at the level of repeated within-person momentary micro-environment, the individual level, or the contextual level of the wider social environment) on mental, behavioural, neural, cellular and molecular outcomes in a single observational or experimental "social" paradigm, taking into account moderation of environmental influence by genetic factors. For example, childhood adversity and having a minority position in society are important social risk factors with powerful effects that can be described in terms of developmental mental, molecular, cellular, neural circuit, cognitive and behavioural effects, in association with evidence of moderation by genetic variation. Bringing these together in a single collaborative research effort, linking the different mechanisms, will make it possible to enrich the outcome of individual research efforts synergistically.

With the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, health decision-makers needed trustworthy evidence to help answer many questions, and they needed it quickly. During 2020, the Cochrane community worked with partners to find ways to respond to this situation and meet the needs of evidence users. This Supplement to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews collects initiatives involving Cochrane groups, in the form of short reports.The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF.

Sociological Theory and the Capability Approach connects normative strands of sociological theory to the fusion of ethics and economics proposed by Amartya Sen’s and Martha Nussbaum’s capability approach. Spanning classical (Hegel, Marx, Durkheim, Scheler, Weber) and contemporary debates (Parsons, Giddens, Luhmann) it identifies areas that bridge the current gap between sociology and capability approach. It thus builds on explanatory and normative concerns shared by both traditions. Engaging readers from sociology and capability approach, Spiros Gangas suggests that the proposed dialogue should be layered along the main areas of value theory, economy and society, extending this inquiry into the normative meaning attached to being human. To this end, the book reconstructs the notion of agency along the tracks of Nussbaum’s central human capabilities, considering also alienation and the sociology of emotions. It concludes by addressing the capability approach through the lens of social institutions before it takes up the challenge of ideological fundamentalism and how it can be effectively confronted by capability approach. This original book provides a fresh perspective on capability approach as it embeds it in the rich pool of sociological theory’s accomplishments. As an exercise in theoretical and normative convergence, it will be required reading for academics and students in social theory, cultural theory, philosophy and human development studies.

MankindVolume 13, Issue 1 p. 83-101 Book Reviews First published: June 1981 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-9310.1981.tb01219.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Book reviewed in this article: Australian Dreaming. 40.000 years of Aboriginal History. Edited by Jennifer Isaacs Radio Power. A History of 3ZZ Access Radio. By Joan Dugdale Department of Anthropology, University of Western Australia Introduction to Australian Society: A Sociological Perspective. By Donald Edgar The New South Wales Wheat Frontier. 1851 to 1911. By M. E. Robinson Department of Anthropology, University of Sydney. Heroin in Australia. By David Hirst Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of Queensland. The Quest for Gaia. A Book of Changes. By Kit Pedler Drinking Careers. Occupations, Drinking Habits, and Drinking Problems. By Martin A. Plant Northern Territory Department of Health, Darwin. Families in Former Times: Kinship, Household and Sexuality. By Jean-Louis Flandrin. Translated by Richard Southern Changing Images of the Family. Edited by Virginia Tufte and Barbara Myerhoff Department of Anthropology, Western Australian Museum. Give and Take. Exchange in Wola Society. By Paul Sillitoe Department of Prehistory and Anthropoloy, S.G.S. Caste: The Emergence of the South Asian Social System. By Morton Klass David Mearns Department of Anthropology, University of Adelaide. Anthropological Structures of Madness in Black Africa. By I. Sow. Translated by Joyce Diamenti Basic Problems of Ethnopsychiatry. By George Devereux Department of Anthropology, University of Otago. Who Should Know What? Social Science, Privacy and Ethics. By J. A. Barnes Department of Sociology, University of N.S.W. Arnold Van Gennep. The Creator of French Ethnography. By Nicole Belmont Department of Prehistory anrf Anthropology, Australian National University. Man, Mind, and Science. A History of Anthropology. By Murray J. Leaf Department of Sociology, University of N.S.W. The Conceptualisation and Explanation of Processes of Social Change. Edited by David Riches School of Behavioural Sciences, Macquarie University. Day of Shining Red. An Essay on Understanding Ritual. By Gilbert Lewis Department of Prehistory and Anthropology, Australian National University. Living Archaeology. By R. A. Gould. New Department of Prehistory and Archaeology, University of New England Experimental Determinatiou of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis. By Lawrence H. Keeley Division of Prehistory, La Trobe University. Archaeological Constructs. An Aspect of Theoretical Archaeology. By Jean-Claude Gardin Division of Prehistory, La Trobe University. The Performing Arts. Music and Dance. Edited by John Blacking and Joann W. Kealiinohomoku Department of Sociology, University of New England. Volume13, Issue1June 1981Pages 83-101 RelatedInformation

The cause to write an article was a question how to examine emotions which are of spatial nature. While the colloquial language copes with “spatiality” of feelings – it knows emotions and calls them (mood, atmosphere, climate, colour) – sociology has not developed a category enabling a systematic analysis of this phenomenon so far. In the theory of arts, the situation is different. The leading subject of the text is reflection on possibility of combining the theory of art and sociology of emotions. The proposed link is to be the concept of image treated as “sensitizing concept” (Herbert Blumer). In the article, I refer to the concepts having their roots in philosophy, social psychology and sociology of emotions which touch upon the issue of spatiality of emotions and compare them to the concepts related to the theory of image.

This book offers a refreshing new approach to mental health by showing how ‘mental health’ behaviours, lived experiences, and our interventions arise from our social worlds and not from our neurophysiology gone wrong. It is part of a trilogy which offers a new way of doing psychology focusing on people’s social and societal environments as determining their behaviour, rather than internal and individualistic attributions. ‘Mental health’ behaviours are carefully analysed as ordinary behaviours which have become exaggerated and chronic because of the bad life situations people are forced to endure, especially as children. This shifts mental health treatments away from the dominance of psychology and psychiatry to show that social action is needed because many of these bad life situations are produced by our modern society itself. By providing new ways for readers to rethink everything they thought they knew about mental health issues and how to change them, Bernard Guerin also explores how by changing our environmental contexts (our local, societal, and discursive worlds), we can improve mental health interventions. This book reframes ‘mental health’ into a much wider social context to show how societal structures restrict our opportunities and pathways to produce bad life situations, and how we can also learn from those who manage to deal with the very same bad life situations through crime, bullying, exploitation, and dropping out of mainstream society, rather than through the ‘mental health’ behaviours. By merging psychology and psychiatry into the social sciences, Guerin seeks to better understand how humans operate in their social, cultural, economic, patriarchal, discursive, and societal worlds, rather than being isolated inside their heads with a ‘faulty brain’, and this will provide fascinating reading for academics and students in psychology and the social sciences, and for counsellors and therapists.