No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 January 2009
Among recent studies of occupational stratification there appears to be a consensus that occupational categories are, with minor variations, similarly evaluated in terms of prestige by individuals of different societies.Is argued that all societies, faced with similar functional problems in the maintenance of complex social systems, find it necessary to ensure that certain types of occupational roles (e.g., political, religious, educational) are filled and their associated tasks performed. To do so, all societies allocate rewards (both material and sociopsychological) to these roles and positions within roles in the form of high prestige. Assuming that all societies have to fill the same basic set of occupational roles, it follows that all societies should exhibit generally similar prestige evaluations of these roles, as measured, for example, by the prestige attributed to the roles by individuals within the society.
2 See Hodge, Robert, Treiman, Donald, and Rossi, Peter, “A Comparative Study of Occupational Prestige,” in Bendix, R. and Lipset, S. M., eds., Class, Status, and Power (New York: The Free Press, 1966), pp. 309–321.Google Scholar Also see Treiman, Donald, Occupational Prestige and Social Structure (Chicago: Markham Press, 1973).Google Scholar
3 For a more detailed discussion of this viewpoint, generally as to the Structural-Functionalist viewpoint, see Barber, Bernard, Social Stratification: A Comparative Analysis of Structure and Process (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1957).Google Scholar Also see the debate between Tumin, Melvine and Moore, Kingsley Davis-Wilbert in Tumin, Melvin, ed., Readings on Social Stratification (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1970), pp. 367–434.Google Scholar
4 Haller, Archibald and Lewis, David, “Research Notes: The Hypothesis of Intersocietal Similarity in Occupational Prestige Hierarchies,” American Journal of Sociology, 72, 2 (1966), 210–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haller, Archibald, Holsinger, Donald, and Saraiva, Helcio, “Variations in Occupational Prestige Hierarchies: Brazilian Data,” American Journal of Sociology, 77, 5 (1972), 941–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 See Kazamias, Andreas, Education and the Quest for Modernity in Turkey (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1966).Google Scholar Also see by the same author, “Potential Elites in Turkey: The Social Origins of the Lise Youth,” Comparative Education Review, 10, 3 (1966), 470–481Google Scholar; and “Potential Elites in Turkey: Exploring the Values and Attitudes of Lise Youth,” Comparative Education Review, 11, 1 (1967), 22–37.Google Scholar
6 Father's educational level was categorized as follows: Low: Orta okul or less. High: Lis¯c or more (including higher vocational institutes).
7 Prior analysis indicated a high correlation between the mean regional educational ratio and the level of regional development scores as developed by Michael Hyland. See Hyland, Michael, “The Party of Ataturk: Tradition and Change in Turkey,” unpublished Ph.D. dissertation (Cambridge: Harvard University, Department of Government, 1969).Google Scholar
8 For a listing of regions, provinces within regions, and the participation ratios for each province and each region see Appendix A.
9 Spearman rank-order correlations are such that perfect agreement between individuals would be scored as +1.00; the existence of a perfect negative relationship as –1.00, and the absence of any relationship between rankings as 0.00. For a detailed discussion of the Spearman rank-order correlation technique see Blalock, Hubert M., Social Statistics (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960).Google Scholar
10 Though not shown in the tables, persons of lower social class in the less developed regions tended to rank the occupations of religious leader and military officer considerably higher than did similar persons in the most developed regions. This was particularly true for persons living in the South Central region, but more so for the religious role than for the military role. While this difference also existed between high and low social classes within and between regions, persons of higher social class backgrounds exhibited greater variation in other rankings (which is reflected in lower rank-order correlations among regions).
11 A number of other studies have likewise pointed to a high percentage of individuals of all social classes aspiring to free professional careers. See Helling, George, “Changing Attitudes toward Occupational Status and Prestige in Turkey,” unpublished paper (Omaha: University of Omaha, 1959)Google Scholar; Frey, Frederick, Regional Variations in Rural Turkey, Report No. 4, Rural Development Research Project (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1966)Google Scholar; Hinderink, H. H. and Kiray, Mübeccel, Social Stratification as an Obstacle to Development (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1970)Google Scholar; Turkish State Planning Office, Türk Köyünde Modernlesme Eğilimleri Arastirmasi (Ankara: Basbakanlik Basimevi, 1970)Google Scholar; and Stone, Russell A., “Anticipated Mobility to Elite Status Among Middle Eastern University Students,” paper presented to the fourth annual meeting of the Middle East Studies Association, Denver, Colorado, 11 1971.Google Scholar
12 Turkish State Planning Office, Türk Köyünde Modernlesme Eğilimleri Arastirmasi, and Stone, Russell A., “Anticipated Mobility to Elite Status Among Middle Eastern University Students.”Google Scholar
13 See Spaeth, Joseph and Greeley, Andrew, Recent Alumni from Higher Education, A General Report Prepared for the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971).Google Scholar
14 For example see Abernathy, David B., The Political Dilemma of Popular Education–An African Case (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1969)Google Scholar; and Foster, Philip J., “Secondary Schooling and Social Mobility in a West African Nation,” Sociology of Education, 37,1 (1963), 150–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15 For a valuable start in this direction see Bill, James A., “Class Analysis and the Dialectics of Modernization in the Middle East,” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 3, 4 (1972), 417–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar