There are many concepts in the world that we take for granted. Things like age or gender seem simple at face value, but there's a lot more to how these concepts operate and are experienced when we take a more in-depth look in sociology.
Explore our app and discover over 50 million learning materials for free.
Lerne mit deinen Freunden und bleibe auf dem richtigen Kurs mit deinen persönlichen Lernstatistiken
Jetzt kostenlos anmeldenNie wieder prokastinieren mit unseren Lernerinnerungen.
Jetzt kostenlos anmeldenThere are many concepts in the world that we take for granted. Things like age or gender seem simple at face value, but there's a lot more to how these concepts operate and are experienced when we take a more in-depth look in sociology.
Social class is just the same - and while sociologists all strive to make the world a more equal place, they often disagree on how we should define, measure, and deal with issues related to social class.
Most sociologists agree that society is stratified, to some extent, into social classes.
It is difficult to give a single, all-encompassing definition for 'social class', as what it means and how it's measured has been widely contested over the years. In general terms, social classes are said to be the particular divisions that society is separated into, based on socioeconomic status.
Broadly, sociologists suggest that three interrelated dimensions interact with social class:
Economic capital is related to factors like occupation, income, and wealth.
Political capital is related to factors like status and levels of power.
Cultural capital is related to factors like norms, values, beliefs, and lifestyle.
Social class is an important concept in sociology, because it gives us operationalised insights into people's life chances; therefore, it helps us understand the distribution of resources that creates inequality.
Sociologists operationalise concepts to make them measurable. For example, a researcher studying levels of happiness in certain communities might create a scale to be able to differentiate between levels of happiness. The scale might run from 1 to 5, with 1 being 'unhappy', 3 being 'indifferent', and 5 being 'very happy'.
Barratt (2005) argues that what constitutes social class is more than just wealth and income. While wealth gives people better access to academic and cultural capital, there's more to being 'upper class' than just having money. This leads us to wonder how social class is measured.
In this section, we'll be going through the various approaches that have been established to define and measure social class both within and outside sociology.
Marxism is a traditional sociological perspective that you're probably well aware of. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (1848) identified the 'two great classes', separated by economic and political factors.
CLASS | DESCRIPTION |
Bourgeoisie (also known as the capitalist ruling class) | Owners of the means of production. |
Proletariat (also known as the working class) | They have only their labour to sell in exchange for a means of survival. |
After the turn of the 19th century, class divisions continued to reflect marked differences in ownership and market position. This gave theorists a good reason to continue using traditional definitions of social class.
Erik Wright and Luca Perrone (1997) used a neo-Marxist ideology to develop a more detailed scale of social class.
Their scale drew on social relationships to the means of production. People were placed on the scale based on where in the production process they were positioned: whether they purchased, controlled, or sold labour.
Basic class relations in Wright & Perrone's (1997) schema | |||
CONTROL OVER INVESTMENTS AND ACCUMULATION PROCESSES | CONTROL OVER PHYSICAL MEANS OF PRODUCTION | CONTROL OVER LABOUR-POWER OF OTHERS | |
BOURGEOISIE | Full control | Full control | Full control |
PROLETARIAT | No control | No control | No control |
PETTY BOURGEOISIE | Full control | Full control | No control |
Wright and Perrone (1977)
However, Wright and Perrone (1997) felt that traditional Marxism failed to consider potential ambiguities or overlaps in class structure, so they added to the scale by identifying 'contradictory class locations'.
Contradictory class locations in Wright & Perrone's (1997) schema | |
CLASS | OCCUPATIONS |
The contradictory location between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat | Managers and supervisors |
The contradictory location between the working class and the petty bourgeoisie | Semi-autonomous employees |
The contradictory location between the bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie | Small employers |
Wright (1976)
The reason that these classes are considered contradictory is that their relationships to the means of production are not as polarised as the traditional classes.
Managers and supervisors form a contradictory class because, while they have control over subordinates (such as wage workers), they're still subject to exploitation from the capitalists (such as business owners), who profit from their labour. The managers don't necessarily own the means of production, but still have control over the processes involved in the means of production.
This goes to show that classes aren't as polarised as was believed by traditional Marxists, giving the neo-Marxist stratification method a significant analytical advantage.
Towards the end of the 19th century, Garry Runciman created another social class measurement scale. The Runciman scale is based on the idea of economic power, which has three dimensions:
Ownership over the means of production.
Control over the production process.
Marketability, in the sense of being skilled and qualified to work.
There are seven distinct social classes on the Runciman scale. He notes that his structure is not static - it is subject to change through individual and collective social mobility.
Social mobility refers to the movement of people within the established hierarchy (such as social classes) of a given society. People can be upwardly or downwardly mobile.
The Runciman Scale | |
CLASS | EXAMPLES |
1. Upper class | Senior manager |
2. Middle classes | |
a) Upper-middle | Manager |
b) Middle | Medium-size owner |
c) Lower-middle | Routing white-collar worker |
3. Working classes | |
a) Skilled | Plumber |
b) Unskilled | Shop assistant |
4. Underclass | Unemployed, welfare-dependent |
By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, most of the population started to rely on paid employment as a means of survival. So, an individual's occupation became the most accurate way of predicting someone's standard of living and life chances.
Because of this, the use of scales measuring occupational groupings became widespread among official statisticians and governments.
Most governments use occupation as a way to quantify social class in their countries. They use scales to survey the population and gauge the general distribution of social classes.
Occupation as a measurement of social class is popular for several reasons: It is objective and quantifiable, which is useful for making comparisons.
The Registrar General's scale (RGSC) was used by the UK government between 1911 and 1980. The RGSC divided the population into five distinct social classes, with class 3 divided into two subclasses.
Registrar General’s social class scale | ||
CLASS | EXAMPLES | |
NON-MANUAL | 1. Professional | Doctors, lawyers, architects |
2. Intermediate | Sales managers, teachers, actors | |
3a. Skilled (non-manual) | Driving instructors, shop assistants, restaurant managers | |
MANUAL | 3b. Skilled (manual) | Welders, decorators, carpenters |
4. Partly skilled | Security guards, caretakers, assembly line workers | |
5. Unskilled | Cleaners, porters, rubbish collectors |
People were placed in classes depending on two measurements related to occupations:
The National Statistics socioeconomic classification (NS-SEC), was established in response to the shortcomings of the RGS in 2001.
There are three versions of the scale, with 8, 5 and 3 classes respectively. This makes them collapsible: they can be summarised from an 8-class scale into a 3-class scale.
NS-SEC classes. Source: ons.gov.uk | ||
8 classes | 5 classes | 3 classes |
1. Higher managerial, administrative, and professional occupations 1.1. Large employers and higher managerial and administrative occupations 1.2. Higher professional occupations 2. Lower managerial, administrative, and professional occupations 3. Intermediate occupations 4. Lower managerial, administrative, and professional 5. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 6. Semi-routine occupations 7. Routine occupations 8. Never worked and long-term unemployed | 1. Higher managerial, administrative, and professional occupations 2. Intermediate occupations 3. Small employers and own-account workers 4. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 5. Semi-routine and routine occupations | 1. Higher managerial, administrative, and professional occupations 2. Intermediate occupations 3. Routine and manual occupations |
It's only the 3-class version of the NS-SEC that's meant to be seen in hierarchical terms. The scale approaches social class based on two key ideas:
Each of the classes is also subject to different levels of contractual regulations.
Typically, class 1 employees receive short and long-term benefits (like salary and career progression) in exchange for their service to the employer.
Classes 5-7 employees receive wages. The amount depends on how much work they've done, or how many hours they've worked.
Class 3 involves intermediate contracts which combine the above elements.
The Great British class survey (GBCS) was established in 2011 by the BBC. It's the biggest class-related survey ever conducted in the United Kingdom, with more than 150,000 responses.
The GBCS asked questions on economic, cultural, and social capital. This included measures of musical tastes and media usage (cultural), proximity to people in certain occupations (social), as well as household income and savings (economic).
As is the case with many ideas in sociology, social class is difficult to measure empirically. This is because social classes don't exist in and of themselves - they exist based on the indicators which we attribute to them.
Let's look at some of the major issues with defining and measuring social class below.
How people choose to define 'social class' is based largely on the indicators that they use to measure it. The problem is that there are multiple, subjective views of these indicators, how to measure them, and their relevance to social class.
Objective indicators include things like education levels, occupation, and income. Regardless of whether the indicators are considered individually or collectively, people will still be classed according to them. How people feel about these indicators doesn't make a difference.
However, subjective indicators arise from people's personal views on the system of classification, and their position within it both individually and relative to other people. Subjective indicators include:
Class consciousness: people's awareness of being in a particular social class, based on the nature of their beliefs and attitudes regarding how classes are defined.
Class identification: whether people feel they are associated with a particular social class, and to what extent they identify with the association.
Oppositional consciousness: an awareness of the fact that different classes may have conflicting interests.
Scholars of sociology sometimes use the reputational method to define and measure social class. The researcher nominates informants who they feel to be very knowledgeable about their community.
The job of the informants is to evaluate the status and class rankings of people in their community and make a judgement about where in the stratification model they should be placed.
There are a few methodological issues with this method - for example, the fact that it relies on the discretion of only a few people to offer their subjective judgements of the whole community.
The structuration theory was developed by Anthony Giddens (1984), who took a somewhat neo-Weberian approach.
Structuration theory suggests that structure and action are of equal importance when we try to make sense of the relationship between society and the individual.
He argued that traditional Weberianism and Marxism overestimate the power of structures in shaping people's behaviour, stating that people have a certain amount of control in being able to reject the constraints of the social class structure. This leads us to wonder how accurate our class measurements and definitions are.
Sarah Arber (1991) studied the use of social class in identifying differences in health. She argued that traditional gender roles in the family interfere with women's general health. The relationship between gender roles and women's health is, in large part, the result of the family's 'material circumstances'.
The problem here, Arber argues, is that differences in labour market participation (as opposed to domestic labour) and divisions in consumption impact a family's material circumstances. So, these factors aren't accurately captured by occupational scales that seek to define and measure social class.
Dale Southerton (2002) examined subjective class boundaries from three distinct groups in the south of England. He found that people identified with class based on conventional, socioeconomic factors.
However, Southerton reported many inconsistencies between and within groups, suggesting that the relationship between social class and identity isn't as linear as previously thought. He argued that how people identify with certain social classes has a lot to do with geographical mobility, as well as the conventions of social relations, and local reputations where those people live.
The generally accepted definition of social class is the division of society based on socioeconomic status. However, there is much debate on how exactly to define and measure social class, so this definition may change depending on the context.
Methods of measuring social class, like its definition, have been widely contested by many scholars. Generally, theorists look at socioeconomic factors like occupation, income, and education.
Broadly, sociologists suggest that there are three interrelated characteristics of social class. These are economic, political, and cultural characteristics.
Social class is a form of stratification in society. There are many different social class measures and scales. Commonly, these scales stratify people into 'upper', 'middle' and 'lower' social classes. However, there are many perspectives that add interim classes to create a more holistic scale.
There isn't an objective, empirical answer to this question. Social classes don't exist in and of themselves; they exist based upon the indicators we attribute to them. These indicators vary, depending on who you ask.
What are the three interrelated capitals which interact with social class?
Political, cultural and judicial.
In general terms, social class are said to be the particular divisions of society that are separated based on...
... socioeconomic status.
What is the word for making sociological concepts measurable?
Operationalise.
Traditional Marxists and neo-Marxists define social class in terms of the individual's relationship to...
... the means of production.
What are 'contradictory class locations'?
'Contradictory class locations' is a term used by Wright and Perrone (1997). It describes classes in which there are ambiguities or overlaps in the structure suggested by traditional Marxists.
Name the seven distinct classes identified in the Runciman scale.
1. Upper class
2a. Upper (middle) class
2b. Middle (middle) class
2c. Lower (middle) class
3a. Skilled working class
3b. Unskilled working class
4. Underclass
Already have an account? Log in
Open in AppThe first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place
Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.
Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!
Sign up with Email Sign up with AppleBy signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of StudySmarter.
Already have an account? Log in
Already have an account? Log in
The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place
Already have an account? Log in