You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The American Perception of Class and Status
Reeve Vanneman and Fred C. Pampel
American Sociological Review
Vol. 42, No. 3 (Jun., 1977), pp. 422-437
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094748
Page Count: 16
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Prestige, Coefficients, Modeling, Middle class, Manuals, Service industries, Automotive industries, Social classes, Cognitive models, Working women
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Most American sociological research has conceptualized the occupational structure as a continuous prestige hierarchy. The research reported here questions the generality of that conceptualization by examining the relative importance of manual-nonmanual class differences and prestige differences for several attitudes and behaviors. First, the perception of "working class" and "middle class" more closely reflects a manual-nonmanual dichotomy than a continuous prestige scale. Voting behavior and party identification are also better predicted by the dichotomy. Second, the relevance of bounded class and continuous status models varies according to the issues involved. Thus, some interpersonal behaviors and individual satisfactions are patterned according to continuous prestige rankings while opinions on societal issues reflect dichotomous class differences. Third, individuals vary in their propensity to use class or status models according to social structural influences. For instance, a prestige orientation is fostered by small, traditional industries while the class dichotomy is more important in large, bureaucratic industries. The evidence also indicates that occupational prestige is more a middle-class concern, with little importance for manual workers.
American Sociological Review © 1977 American Sociological Association