Abstract
In this paper the AA. respond to the critiques of their work undertaken under the auspices of the CASMIN project that are presented by Hout and Hauser and by Sorensen in preceding papers in this number. They treat in turn issues concerning data comparability and the class schema that the AA. use as the basis for their analyses of mobility; their model of « core social fluidity »; and empirical results relevant to the evaluation of the FJH-hypothesis. In conclusion the AA. point to certain conceptual presuppositions and related research interests which they would see as deeply rooted in the American tradition of work in the field of social stratification and mobility and which, they suggest, throw light on the nature of the reaction that their work has provoked
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.
