Cocking A Snook Too!

Independent, Irreverent Unschoolers – or at least one – Take On the Universe

The Principles of Sociology (Part 1) August 29, 2007

As my mom is bursting with pride to tell everyone, I am enrolled in Sociology 101 this fall. It is highly illuminating, and I felt that I should share some of my knowledge with you. I also felt that this knowledge should be in the format of allegorical cartoons of stick figures.

So I proudly present my drawing (the first in a many-part series) illustrating what I gleaned in my first two classes. Please, read with discretion — I would not want you imprisoned by the board of education for gaining complete understanding of the basics of sociology without paying them money. The board of education can be quite brutal, what with their secret roaming police who keep an extensive list about what you read, where, and when, and I would not want your death on my head.

sociology-pt-10001.jpg

Advertisements
 

2 Responses to “The Principles of Sociology (Part 1)”

  1. JJ Says:

    This seems to connect from the Washington Post, about the societal contagion of obesity, its changing norms, even how obesity may cause poverty as much as the other way around.

    Sociology! Psychology! Complex puzzles to think about! Who could ask for anything more? 🙂

    . . .A social norm creates an ideal image of behavior that acts as a constraint on what individuals might otherwise do. Psychological surveys have shown that different socio-economic and ethnic groups have markedly different notions of what constitutes an ideal body weight. In the U.S. and Britain, for example, obesity rates are much higher among lower income groups.

    The presumption is that if you depart from the ideal too much, you will feel badly about yourself and, furthermore, others will make you feel badly.

    There is substantial empirical evidence for this ‘stigma effect’. Our research, based on surveys of well-being, finds that in cohorts where obesity rates are high, obese people do not report being more unhappy than others, whereas in cohorts where obesity rates are low, obese people tend to be much unhappier than the mean (controlling for other factors such as age, gender and income). In other words, it makes you less unhappy to be obese if others around you are obese. Our research also finds a negative link between obesity and upward income mobility; if you are obese and work at Walmart, you are less likely to move on to a better job than if you are not. Thus higher obesity norms may be poverty as well as health traps.

    One outstanding puzzle is how the current obesity epidemic got started. Why did it suddenly take off more or less simultaneously in different socioeconomic and ethnic groups in the early 1980s? “Junk” food was surely widely available long before then. Was it the result of a change in the cost of food, of marketing campaigns by fast food chains, or attitudes about exercise? And why have such significant differences in levels of obesity and stigma persisted among groups?

    Whatever the ultimate trigger of the obesity epidemic might have been, it seems very likely that social norms are playing a critical role in the way it continues to spread.

    Because social norms and social networks seem to play such an important role, computer simulations of social systems can be a very useful tool for solving the puzzles surrounding the obesity epidemic. These simulations can help us understand how the structure of social networks affects the spread of norms and weight change.

    For example, the simulations we use in our research suggest that overall social norms about weight can shift dramatically as a result of even small changes by some members of the group. Simulation models can also suggest policies for interrupting the spread, for example by targeting individuals who act as role models in particular communities or by changing the mixture of social messages that reach a network.

    The goal of studying obesity is, ultimately, to try to reverse its dramatic rise and to close these gaps in its incidence among groups. To do that, policymakers need to understand the processes that led to the increase and the disparities in the first place — not just what factors matter, but how and why they matter. Much public attention has gone to the role of cheap “junk” food, for example. Much less has gone to explaining why some cohorts consume so much of it and become obese, while others do not and maintain completely different weight norms.

    It is becoming clear that social influence matters in obesity. But more research is needed to uncover exactly how it matters. We are using novel techniques — computer simulations and well being surveys — to study the problem and how we might use social networks to help us slow or reverse the alarming increase in obesity. Should policies be targeted at network leaders, for example? Should the links between obesity and lower levels of income mobility be made more explicit as a possible incentive, or will that merely exacerbate low expectations and poverty traps? We do not know at this point.

    Until we understand the causes at work, we cannot design effective policies to intervene, and we will continue to spend large sums of resources on public health messages that are not reaching the right audience.

  2. JJ Says:

    p.s. love the torches and pitchforks!


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s