Encyclopedia of SociologyVol._4

tion, but receiving a Catholic school education gives one a relatively lesser chance to obtain a college degree.

Young adult unemployment in Australia varied between 27 percent and 52 percent from the mid-1960s to the early 1980s. One might assume that most youths were encouraged to obtain further education, but that was not always the case. A revision of the Ajzen–Fishbein model of attitude– behavior relations (Carpenter et al. 1989) was used to assess youths’ intentions toward entering the workforce immediately after high school; the influence of economic conditions also was considered in this model. Parental and peer influence played a powerful role in molding a youth’s intentions; however, the youth’s decision to transform the intention into action was mediated by his or her self-perception of past academic performance.

Greece. A Greek study (Kostakis 1992) examined information and occupational demands in terms of the specific sources Greek students might use to influence their decisions about the future. How and from whom one gains information was considered a socially determined process. An individual’s significant others, consisting of friends and relatives, appeared to be the most important source of information for all groups; however, significant others were more available to higherstatus individuals. Considered as an information source for vocational occupations, schooling was relied on by lower-status youths, rural youths, and girls.

Israel. In many studies, teachers were viewed as significant others, but their influence on status attainment did not appear to be large. However, little was known about a teacher’s long-term influence on status attainment. A national representative sample of 834 Israeli adults aged 21–65 was studied to ascertain the effect of the influence of a former teacher (Enoch et al. 1992). The group was divided into two cohort groups: older (ages 40–65) and younger (ages 21–39). Perceived teacher influence was found to be a determining factor in respect to occupation only for the older group. Furthermore, it was found that the Oriental (Sephardic) older group perceived teacher influence as being greater than did any of the other groups in terms of occupational attainment, whereas the older Ashkenazic group identified perceived

teacher influence as a significant variable in educational attainment.

Occupational Status Attainment in the United States: The Role of Gender. Typical status attainment models account for more variance in male occupational attainment than in female occupational attainment. A possible reason is that typical occupational status attainment models view occupations as discrete categorical variables as opposed to preferences along a continuum. When occupational titles were measured as a continuous variable, as was done by the Wisconsin researchers, it was found that a student’s gender and a family’s socioeconomic status were related to occupational choice. Additionally, significant others’ expectations for a student played a role in determining aspirations. Significant others’ expectations appeared to be affected most by gender as opposed to aptitude or ability. Thus, males and females may have their aspirations influenced by significant others who seem to choose traditional gender occupations for them (Saltiel 1988).

After the 1960s and 1970s, occupational status attainment research in the United States focused on gender differences in attainment, perhaps because changes in gender roles accelerated at that time. More women have chosen to pursue higher education and enter male-dominated careers than ever before. How will the increasing diversity of occupations open to women affect women’s aspirations and eventual occupational attainment?

There were no significant differences in levels of occupational aspiration between boys and girls and in different high school grades in the early 1960s (Haller et al. 1974). However, little research examining gender differences was conducted in the 1970s and the early to middle 1980s to determine whether aspirations affected occupational attainment.

Consistent with the Wisconsin model, women in the 1980s who pursued male-dominated careers such as business, engineering, and law were found to be subjected to a network of influences, as opposed to a single influence. Parents’ educational level was acknowledged as an influence in typical status attainment research, but until the late 1980s, the specific effect of parents’ possession of a college degree on their children was not considered. For both African-American and white women, parental income was found to have a

significant indirect effect on women’s educational attainment. Furthermore, for white women only, the father’s and mother’s education proved to have significant indirect effects (Gruca et al. 1988).

Women recently have been receiving approximately 50 percent of the bachelor’s degrees in life sciences and mathematics, but they are significantly underrepresented in science and mathematics occupations (National Research Council 1991). If women are attaining initial degrees in the same numbers as men, why are they not represented equally in the fields to which those degrees lead?

For women, significant factors associated with persistence in scientific and mathematical careers after college include receiving encouragement from teachers and parents, particularly the mother (Rayman and Brett 1995). Those who stay in science and mathematics careers after graduation do not necessarily believe that their current occupation is compatible with family life; however, the majority of these women have not been affected by family needs. Those who changed careers from a mathematicsor science-related occupation to one not oriented in those directions were more likely to believe that family need plays a role in occupational attainment. Over 50 percent of this group had taken time off from work, refused promotions, reduced their work schedules to part-time, or changed location because of family need. Grades in science and mathematics courses did not significantly affect attitude and achievement in science and mathematics. Additionally, self-esteem and perceived self-confidence did not play a role in deciding who stayed with scientific and mathematical careers and who did not (Rayman and Brett 1995).

Occupational Status Attainment outside the United States. Canada. The Canadian Mobility Study (Boyd et al. 1995) was directly influenced by the 1962 Occupational Change in a Generation Study in the United States. Using data from the early 1970s, this study showed that great inequalities exist in income, assets, and educational attainment between genders and among those with various ethnic origins (Porter 1995, p. 61). Preliminary research indicated that motherhood, as opposed to or in addition to being married, was the most significant variable determining the occupational status attainment of native-born Canadian

women (Boyd 1995a, p. 284). This finding makes sense, as motherhood, as opposed to marriage, generally requires time off from work. Some women choose to stay at home to raise a child; even if this time off from work is brief, by affecting continuity of employment, it affects one’s advancement potential.

Interestingly, occupation and status seem to be consistent from generation to generation (McRoberts 1995, p. 98). One of the reasons for this is that the advantages of background often are passed on to children. For example, wealthy parents are more likely to have received higher education and are better able to afford to have their children receive higher education. Although it is not impossible for a child from a lower-income family to attend an institution of higher education, it is not as likely. This conclusion comes from a study of Canadian-born males in 1973 whose occupations were compared with those of their fathers.

Also of interest is the role of immigrants in status attainment levels in Canada. Native-born Canadian men have an average occupational status lower than that of American-born, Germanborn, and United Kingdom–born male immigrants and an average occupational status higher than that of immigrants from Poland, Italy, Greece, and Portugal (Boyd 1995b, p. 440). Much of the inequality between the Canadian-born and non-Ca- nadian-born men results from differences in family origin and education.

Similarly, non-Canadian-born women tend to have an average occupational status lower than that of Canadian-born women, but non-Canadian status seems to have less of an impact on female immigrants from the Unites States and the United Kingdom. As in the United States, females have a lower average occupational status than do males (Boyd 1995b, p. 441).

Taiwan. Taiwan consists primarily of three ethnic groups: the aborigines, the Taiwanese, and the mainlanders. Although the Taiwanese account for slightly more than 85 percent of the population, the mainlanders, who account for approximately 12 percent, hold the political power. A study involving 3,924 men from the three ethnic groups determined that the mainlanders had an average occupational status higher than that of the Taiwanese or the aborigines (Tsai 1992).

The father’s occupation was found to be the determining factor for first occupation among aborigines over 35 years old. However, for those under 35 years of age, residence and educational attainment were found to be significant influences on the first occupation. This result was different for the Taiwanese and the mainlanders, for whom the most important determinant of first occupation was their level of educational attainment (Tsai 1992).

Israel. In Israel, a better education does not necessarily predict better occupational attainment (Semyonov and Yuchtmahn-Yaar 1992). It once was believed that as Arabs became increasingly integrated into the general Jewish population in Israel, educational attainment and status attainment would become more equal between those two groups. From 1972 through 1983, the Arab population increased its average educational attainment level; however, its average occupational attainment declined. Market discrimination was estimated to account for 6.5 percent of the occupational gap between Jews and Arabs in the highest age group (ages 54–65), but its effect increased to nearly 25 percent in the youngest age group (ages 25–36). Clearly, there are social variables at work here that are not included in traditional status attainment models.

Political and Economic Status. Little research has been conducted in the areas of political and economic status. The link of economic status to the prior generation is much weaker than are educational and occupational links that generation. There are a number of reasons why economic status is much more difficult to study than are the educational or occupational variables. Many studies rely on participants to report information for their parents, and although occupational and educational attainments generally are known to family members, specific income information, particularly over a life span, is not. Also, the fluctuating rate of inflation makes it difficult to compare incomes directly across generations. Additionally, an economy’s supplies and demands vacillate and ultimately determine an occupation’s worth at a given moment. Thus, although the prestige of occupations may not change much, the income associated with those positions may change a great deal, in part as a result of market forces. Finally, the range of incomes today is greater than ever before. Chief executive officers, entertainment

performers, and professional athletes command high incomes. With more income ‘‘outliers’’ today, reliably measuring income and incorporating it into status attainment models are difficult. As a result of these factors, less is known about income status attainment than about educational or occupational attainment.

Similarly, little is known about political status attainment. Political status originally was defined as influence, authority, coercion, and power. Unlike occupational and educational achievement, which have been relatively well defined, there is little agreement on a person’s political status.

In a study involving sports teams across cultures, age, experience, and performance were deemed to be the most significant factors in defining status in Canada and India ( Jacob and Carron 1996). Both cultures gave more importance to achieved sources of status, such as experience and performance level, than to ascribed status, such as religion, race, and parental occupation. Surprisingly, age was found to be a significant determinant of status, apparently because it serves as an indicator of experience.

CONCLUSION

Some analysts, including Breiger (1995) and Ganzeboom et al. (1991), believe that theory formulation has become very narrow in social attainment research. However, there are several directions future research can take. First, status allocation research can increasingly feature the systematic incorporation of societal factors considered from the perspective of the individual. For example, advances in network analysis will allow measurement of extended networks and the influences of their members (Wasserman and Faust 1994). Similarly, simulation can provide a method to test models of social influence posited in status allocation models, allowing the investigation of the stability, equilibrium, rate of change, and other qualitative features of status dynamics in a social group (see Gilbert and Doran 1994; Jacobsen and Bronson 1995; Latané 1996). Finally, more extensive measurement of the multidimensional features of occupations and the related variables will allow the creation of models of greater complexity, for example, reflecting nonprestige or nonhierarchical features of status allocation (see Woelfel and Fink 1980).

This article makes it evident that researchers need to focus anew on conceptual clarity and theoretical parsimony. In the future, it is important that new research be executed with variables that include all that have been specified as crucial, along with the causal lines that were so specified, as elements of the theory referred to as the Wisconsin model (Haller 1982). As implied here, this should be done for both males and females in different decades and in societies with differing stratification structures.

REFERENCES

Alwin, D. F. 1989 ‘‘William H. Sewell: Recipient of the 1988 Cooley-Mead Award.’’ Social Psychology Quarterly 52(2):85–87.

Blau, P. M., and O. D. Duncan, 1967 The American Occupational Structure. New York: Wiley.

Boyd, M. 1995a ‘‘Educational and Occupational Attainments of Native-Born Canadian Men and Women.’’ In M. Boyd, J. Goyder, F. E. Jones, H. A. McRoberts,

P.C. Pineo, and J. Porter, eds., Ascription and Achievement: Studies in Mobility and Status Attainment in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University Press.

———1995b ‘‘Immigration and Occupational Attainment in Canada.’’ In M. Boyd, J. Goyder, F. E. Jones,

H.A. McRoberts, P. C. Pineo, and J. Porter, eds.,

Ascription and Achievement: Studies in Mobility and Status Attainment in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University Press.

———, J. Goyder, F. E. Jones, H. A. McRoberts, P. C. Pineo, and J. Porter 1995 Ascription and Achievement: Studies in Mobility and Status Attainment in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University Press.

Breiger, R. L. 1995 ‘‘Social-Structure and the Phenomenology of Attainment.’’ Annual Review of Sociology 21:115–136.

Burke, P. J. 1989 ‘‘Academic Identity and Race Differences in Educational Aspirations.’’ Social Science Research 18:136–150.

———, and J. W. Hoelter 1988 ‘‘Identity and SexRelated Differences in Educational and Occupational Aspirations Formation.’’ Social Science Research 17:29–47.

Carpenter, P. G., J. A. Gleishman, and J. S. Western 1989 ‘‘Job Intentions and Job Attainment: Young People’s Career Beginnings.’’ Australian Journal of Education 33(3):299–319.

Duncan, O. D. 1968 ‘‘Social Stratification and Mobility: Problems in the Measurement of Trend.’’ In E. B.

Sheldon and W. E. Moore, eds., Indicators of Social Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Enoch, Y. R. Shapira, and A. Yogev 1992 ‘‘Teachers as Significant Others in the Status Attainment of Israeli Adults.’’ In A. Yougev, ed., International Perspectives on Education and Society, vol. 2. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.

Ganzeboom, H. B. G., D. J. Treiman, and W. C. Ultee 1991 ‘‘Comparative Intergenerational Stratification Research: Three Generations and Beyond.’’ Annual Review of Sociology 17:277–302.

Gilbert, N., and J. Doran, eds. 1994 Simulating Society: The Computer Simulation of Social Phenomena. London: UCL Press.

Gruca, J. M., C. A. Ethington, and E. T. Pascarella 1988 ‘‘Intergenerational Effects of College Graduation on Career Sex Atypicality in Women.’’ Research in Higher Education 29(2):99–124.

Haller, A. O. 1970 ‘‘Changes in the Structure of Status Systems.’’ Rural Sociology 35:469–487.

———1982 ‘‘Reflections on the Social Psychology of Status Attainment.’’ In R. M. Hauser, D. Mechanic, A. O. Haller, and T. S. Hauser, eds., Social Structure and Behavior. New York: Academic Press.

———2000 ‘‘Societal Stratification.’’ In E. A. Borgatta and Rhonda V. J. Montgomery, eds., Encyclopdia of Sociology, 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.

Haller, A. O., and Miller, I. W. 1971 The Occupational Aspiration Scale. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.

———, L. B. Otto, R. F. Meier, and G. W. Ohlendorf 1974 ‘‘Level of Occupational Aspiration: An Empirical Analysis.’’ American Sociological Review 39:113–121.

———, and A. Portes 1973 ‘‘Status Attainment Processes.’’ Sociology of Education 46:51–91.

———, and J. Woelfel 1969 ‘‘Identifying Significant Others and Measuring Their Expectations for a Person.’’ Revue Internationale de Sociologie 5:395–429.

——— 1972 ‘‘Significant Others and their Expectations: Concepts and Instruments to Measure Interpersonal Influence on Status Aspirations.’’ Rural Sociology 37:591–622.

———, ———, and E. L. Fink 1969 The Wisconsin Significant Other Battery. Arlington Heights, Va.: Educational Resources Information Document Center.

Hauser, R. M., S. Tsai, and W. H. Sewell 1983 ‘‘A Model of Stratification with Response Error in Social and Psychological Variables.’’ Sociology of Education 56:20–46.

Heider, F. 1958 The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

Jacob, C. S., and A. V. Carron 1996 ‘‘Sources of Status in Sport Teams.’’ International Journal of Sport Psychology

27(4):369–382.

Jacobsen, C., and R. Bronson 1995 ‘‘Computer Simulations and Empirical Testing of Sociological Theory.’’

Sociological Methods and Research 23:479–506.

Kostakis. A. 1992 ‘‘Social Determinations of the Use of Information as It Relates to Occupational Choices of Greek Youth.’’ In A. Yougev, ed., International Perspectives on Education and Society, vol. 2. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.

Latané, B. 1996 ‘‘Dynamic Social Impact Theory: The Creation of Culture by Communication.’’ Journal of Communication 46(4):13–25.

Lewin, K. 1939 ‘‘Field Theory and Experiment in Social Psychology.’’ American Journal of Sociology 44:868–897.

Lewin, K. 1951 Field Theory in Social Science. D. Cartwright, ed. New York: Harper.

McRoberts, H. A. 1995 ‘‘Mobility and Attainment in Canada: The Effects of Origin.’’ In M. Boyd, J. Goyder, F. E. Jones, H. A. McRoberts, P. C. Pineo, and J. Porter, eds., Ascription and Achievement: Studies in Mobility and Status Attainment in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University Press.

Mead, G. H. 1934 Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Morgan, S. L. 1998 ‘‘Adolescent Educational Expectations.’’ Rationality and Society 10:131–162.

National Research Council 1991 Women in Science and Engineering: Increasing Their Numbers in the 1990’s. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Porter, J. 1995 ‘‘Canada: The Societal Content of Occupational Allocation.’’ In M. Boyd, J. Goyder, F. E. Jones, H. A. McRoberts, P. C. Pineo, and J. Porter, eds., Ascription and Achievement: Studies in Mobility and Status Attainment in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Carleton University Press.

Rayman, P., and B. Brett 1995 ‘‘Women Science Ma- jors—What Makes a Difference in Persistence after Graduation?’’ Journal of Higher Education 66(4):388–414.

Reynolds, A. J. 1989 ‘‘A Structural Model of First Grade Outcomes for an Urban, Low Socioeconomic Status, Minority Population.’’ Journal of Educational Psychology 81(4):594–603.

——— 1991 ‘‘The Middle Schooling Process: Influences on Science and Mathematics Achievement from the Longitudinal Study of American Youth.’’ Adolescence 26(101):133–158.

——— 1992 ‘‘A Process Model of Mathematics Achievement and Attitude.’’ Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 23(4):306–328.

Saha, L. J. 1985 ‘‘The Legitimacy of Early School Leaving: Occupational Orientations, Vocational Training Plans, and Educational Attainment among Urban Australian Youth.’’ Sociology of Education 58:228–240.

Saltiel, J. 1988 ‘‘The Wisconsin Model of Status Attainment and the Occupational Choice Process.’’ Work and Occupations 15(3):334–355.

Semyonov, M., and E. Yuchtman-Yaar 1992 ‘‘Ethnicity, Education, and Occupational Inequality: Jews and Arabs in Israel.’’ In A. Yougev, ed., International Perspectives on Education and Society, vol. 2. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.

Sewell, W. H., A. O. Haller, and G. W. Ohlendorf 1970 ‘‘The Educational and Early Occupational Status Attainment Process: Replication and Revision.’’ American Sociological Review 35(16):1014–1027.

———, ———, and A. P. Portes 1969 ‘‘The Educational and Early Occupational Attainment Process.’’ American Sociological Review 34(1):82–92.

Sorokin, P. A. 1927 Social Mobility. New York: Harper and Row.

Svalastoga, K. 1965 Social Differentiation. New York:

David McKay.

Tsai, S. 1992 ‘‘Social Change and Status Attainment in Taiwan: Comparisons of Ethnic Groups.’’ In A. Yougev, ed., International Perspectives on Education and Society, vol. 2. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.

Van de Geer, J. P. (1971). Introduction to Multivariate Analysis for the Social Sciences. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

Wasserman, S., and K. Faust 1994 Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Williams, T., and P. G. Carpenter 1990 ‘‘Private Schooling and Public Education.’’ Australian Journal of Education 34(1):3–24.

Woelfel, J. D., and E. L. Fink 1980 The Measurement of Communication Processes: Galileo Theory and Method. New York: Academic Press.

Zeigarnik, B. 1927, Über das behalten von erledigten und unerledigten Handlungen. Psycholigisch Forschung 9:1–85.

———, and H. J. Walberg, 1991 ‘‘A Structural Model of Science Achievement.’’ Journal of Educational Psychology 83(1):97–107.

ARCHIBALD O. HALLER

EDWARD L. FINK

LAURA JANUSIK

SOCIAL RESOURCES THEORY

NOTE: Although the following article has not been revised for this edition of the Encyclopedia, the substantive coverage is currently appropriate. The editors have provided a list of recent works at the end of the article to facilitate research and exploration of the topic.

This article introduces the theory of social resources (Lin 1982, 1983). It describes the fundamental propositions of the theory and reviews empirical research programs and results pertaining to the theory. It concludes with a discussion of some issues regarding extensions and modifications of the theory.

Resources are goods, material as well as symbolic, that can be accessed and used in social actions. Of particular interest are the valued re- sources—resources consensually considered as important for maintaining and improving individuals’ chances of survival as they interact with the external environment. In general, valued resources are identified with indicators of class, status, and power in most societies. In the following discussion, resources refer to valued resources.

Resources can be classified in two categories: personal resources and social resources. Personal resources are resources belonging to an individual; they include such ascribed and achieved characteristics as gender, race, age, religion, education, occupation, and income as well as familial resources. These resources are in the possession of the individual and at the disposal of the individual. Social resources, on the other hand, are resources embedded in one’s social network and social ties. These are the resources in the possession of the other individuals to whom ego has either direct or indirect ties. A friend’s car, for example, may be ego’s social resources. Ego may borrow it for use and return it to the friend. Ego does not possess the car, and accesses and uses it only if the friend is willing to lend it. The friend retains the ownership. Similarly, a friend’s social, economic, or political position may be seen as ego’s social resources. Ego may seek the friend’s help in exercising that resource in order for ego to obtain or achieve a specific goal.

Much of sociological research focuses on personal resources. While social network analysis has been a long-standing research tradition in sociology and psychology, attention had been given to

the structure and patterns of ties and relations. Only recently, in the past two decades, sociologists and anthropologists have explored the theoretical significance of the resources brought to bear in the context of social networks and social ties. The theory of social resources makes explicit the assumption that resources embedded in social connections play important roles in the interaction between social structure and individuals. More specifically, the theory explores how individuals access and use social resources to maintain or promote self-interests in a social structure that consists of social positions hierarchically related and organized in terms of valued resources. It has been argued that social resources are accessed and mobilized in a variety of actions by an individual to achieve instrumental and/or expressive goals.

Two terms need some clarifications here. I assume that a social structure consists of different levels, each of which can include a set of structurally equivalent positions. They are equivalent primarily on the basis of levels of similar valued resources, and secondarily, similar life-styles, attitudes, and other cultural and psychological factors. For the purposes here, the terms, ‘‘levels’’ and ‘‘positions,’’ are used interchangeably. Also, status attainment is assumed to refer to the voluntary aspect of social mobility. Involuntary social mobility, due to job dissatisfaction, lack of alternatives, or other ‘‘pushing’’ or forced factors, is excluded from consideration. As Granovetter (1986) pointed out, voluntary social mobility generally results in wage growth. Likewise, it is argued that voluntary social mobility accounts for the majority of occurrences in status attainment.

THEORY OF SOCIAL RESOURCES AND

SOCIAL ACTIONS

Attention in this article will be given to the theory of social resources as it is applied to the context of instrumental actions. Instrumental actions are a class of actions motivated by the intent to gain valued resources (e.g., seeking a better occupational position). In contrast, expressive actions are a class of actions motivated by the intent to maintain valued resources (e.g., seeking to maintain a marital relationship). Social resources have broad implications for both types of social actions (Lin 1986). However, for the present discussion, social resources will be considered in the perspective of

instrumental actions only. To carry the discussion at a more concrete level, attention will be given to the status attainment process, which can be seen as a typical process focusing on an instrumental goal. In the following material, the propositions of the theory of social resources will be presented in the specific framework of the status attainment process, to illuminate clearly and concretely the theoretical implications in a specific research tradition.

I have specified three hypotheses (Lin 1982): the social resources hypothesis, the strength-of- position hypothesis, and the strength-of-ties hypothesis. The social resources hypothesis, the primary proposition of the theory, states that access to and use of better social resources leads to more successful instrumental action. In the case of status attainment, it predicts that job-seekers are more likely to find a better job (in terms of prestige, power, and/or income) when they are able to contact a source with better resources (in terms of occupation, industry, income, etc.).

The other two hypotheses identify factors that determine the likelihood of access to and use of better social resources. The strength-of-position hypothesis stipulates that the level of original position is positively associated with access to and use of social resources. For the process of status attainment, it suggests that the original social position of a jobseeker is positively related to the likelihood of contacting a source of better resources. Position of origin can be represented by characteristics of ego’s parents or previous jobs.

The strength-of-ties hypothesis proposes that use of weaker ties is positively related to access to and use of social resources. For status attainment, it states that there is a positive relationship between the use of weaker ties and the likelihood of contacting a source of better resources. For the formulation of the strength of weak ties argument, see Granovetter (1973, 1974).

Thus, the theory contains one proposition postulating the effect of social resources and two propositions postulating causes of social resources. The strength-of-position hypothesis implies an inheritance effect. A given position of origin in the hierarchical structure in part decides how well one may get access to better social resources embedded in the social structure. It is a structural factor and independent of individuals in the structure, although individuals may benefit. On the other

hand, the strength-of-ties hypothesis suggests the need for individual action. Normal interactions are dictated by the homophily principle, the tendency to engage in interaction with others of similar characteristics and life-styles. Going beyond the routine set of frequent interactants and seeking out weaker ties represent action choices beyond most of the normative expectations of the macrostructure (see Granovetter 1973, 1974).

It is true that the beginning of a job search often is unplanned. Many job leads become available through casual occasions (e.g., parties) and through interactions with casual acquaintances. It is not necessarily the case that a job search always begins with the individual actively seeking out contacts for this purpose. However, this does not negate the basic premise that individuals are situated at different levels of positions in the structure and have, therefore, access to ‘‘casual’’ occasions involving participants of certain types and amounts of resources, including social resources. In fact, it has been empirically demonstrated (Campbell, Marsden, and Hulbert 1986; Lin and Dumin 1986) that higher-level positions have greater access to more diverse and heterogenous levels of positions in the hierarchical structure than lower-level positions, therefore having greater command of social resources. Thus, it can be expected that ‘‘casual’’ occasions for the higher-level positions are structurally richer in job and other types of information and influence. Such structural advantage, deducible from the pyramidal assumption of the theory, has distinct effect when a job search is eventually launched by the individual. In relative terms, the strength of position should have stronger effects on social resources than the strength of ties. This statement recognizes the significance of structural constraints everywhere in the social structure. In empirical systems, both factors are expected to operate, even though their relative effects may vary.

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH AND

THEORETICAL EXTENSIONS

Research programs examining the theory of social resources in the context of socioeconomic attainment have been carried out in North America (Ensel 1979; Lin, Ensel, and Vaughn 1981; Lin, Vaughn, and Ensel 1981; Marsden and Hulbert 1988), in West Germany and the Netherlands (Flap and De Graaf 1988; De Graaf and Flap 1988;

Sprengers, Tazelaar and Flap 1988; Boxman, Flap, and De Graaf 1989; Wegener 1991), in Taiwan (Sun and Hsiong 1988), and in China (Lin and Bian 1990). Thus far, evidence strongly supports two of the three hypotheses: the social-resource hypothesis and the strength-of-positions hypothesis. Those with better origins tend to find sources for better resources in job-seeking, while contacting a source of better resources increases the likelihood of finding a better job. These relations hold even after the usual status attainment variables (e.g., education and first-job status) are taken into account. These results, as Marsden and Hulbert showed, are not biased by the fact that only those contacting interpersonal sources in job-seeking are selected for study.

However, evidence is equivocal on the strength- of-(weak) ties hypothesis. For example, Lin and associates have found evidence that weaker ties linked job-seekers to contacts with better resources, whereas Marsden and Hulbert (1988) did not. The different findings may be due to the interaction between the two exogenous variables: the strength of position and the strength of ties. Lin and others have found that the advantage of using weaker ties over the use of stronger ties decreases as the position of origin approaches the top of the levels. Lin, Ensel, and Vaughn (1981) hypothesized a ceiling effect for weak ties. At the top of the hierarchical structure there is no advantage to using weak ties, since such ties are likely to lead to inferior positions and therefore inferior resources. They did not anticipate similar ineffectiveness of weaker ties toward the bottom of the structure. Marsden and Hulbert (1988), however, also found that those with the lowest origins did not benefit more from contacts with weaker ties in gaining access to better resources than from contacts with stronger ties. One speculation is that those at the lower positions have more restricted range of contacts (Campbell, Marsden and Hulbert 1986; Lin and Dumin 1986), rendering the weaker ties accessible less effective. Thus, a nonlinear relationship (interaction) between strength of ties and social resources may be involved (Wegener 1991).

Another elaboration concerns the distinction between two types of social resources: network resources and contact resources. Network resources refer to resources embedded in one’s ongoing social networks and ties. In this conceptualization, the researcher is interested in identifying the on-

going social ties, and from these identified ties, exploring resources they have. These resources are seen as social resources to ego (Campbell, Marsden, and Hulbert 1986; Lin and Dumin 1986; Boxman and Flap 1990). Contact resources, on the other hand, refer to resources associated specifically with a tie or ties accessed and mobilized in a particular action. For example, the researcher is interested in identifying the contact ego used in a particular job-seeking situation and specifying the social resources in terms of what resources the contact possessed (Lin, Ensel, and Vaughn 1981; Marsden and Hulbert 1988; Sun and Hsiong 1988; Lin and Bian 1990). Recent research (Lai, Leung, and Lin 1990) shows that network resources and contact resources are two conceptually distinctive and causally related components of social resources. Network resources, reflecting resources in ego’s social network, contribute to the access of contact resources in the context of a particular action (e.g., seeking a job). Each in turn contributes to the ultimate success of the action (e.g., getting a highstatus occupation).

FURTHER RESEARCH ISSUE

Some theoretical and methodological issues remain in the extension and application of the social resources theory.

One issue concerns the cost of social resources. Unlike personal resources, which ego may use and dispose of relatively free of constraints, social resources are ‘‘borrowed’’ from one’s social ties. Thus, there should be a cost attached to such access. In most cases there is an implied obligation of reciprocity—that is, ego is committed to offer his or her resources as social resources to the alter from whom resources have been borrowed. The problem arises when ego and the alter do not occupy similar social positions, thus possessing dissimilar resources. In the case of ego seeking help from the alter, in fact, the better the social position the alter occupies, the more effective it provides social resources to ego. It is conceivable that ego possesses other resources, which may provide to be useful to the alter in the reciprocity process. For example, a banker (ego) may seek political influence from a politician (the alter), who in turn may secure financial benefit with ego’s help. Fair exchange of different valued resources occurs. There will also be situations where ego

with inferior resources gains as a result of help from an alter with superior resources (e.g., a graduate student getting a desirable job with the help of a professor), the reciprocity becomes more intricate. One way of reciprocity requires quantity in compensation of quality (e.g., willingness to put more effort into a research or writing collaboration). Another form of reciprocity requires efforts to increase the value of the alter’s resources (e.g., citations to the professor’s work in one’s publications). Variations in such reciprocal uses of social resources and, therefore, in cost deserve further conceptualization and research.

Another area worthy of research attention is the use of social resources for expressive actions. It has been hypothesized that, in contrast to instrumental actions, expressive actions would be more effective if ego and the alter share similar traits and experiences. The argument is that homophily (sharing similar characteristics and life-styles) increases the likelihood of the alter understanding the emotional stress experienced by ego (Lin 1986). Thus, the expectation is that strong ties, rather than weak ties, may provide the more desirable social resources for expressive actions. However, reality is much less tidy than this conceptualization. In some expressive actions (e.g., seeking support in time of a divorce), both emotional and instrumental support are needed. Further complicating the situation is that often the strong ties (e.g., spouse) are the sources of stress, and expressive actions must by definition be provided by either weaker ties or surrogate strong ties (e.g., relatives or a friend or professional helper) (Lin and Westcott forthcoming). Much more conceptual and empirical work is needed to tease out these issues.

Finally, there is the intriguing question of whether the theory of social resources can help conceptualizing the interplays between social structure and social action. I argue that the theory of social resources makes two kinds of contributions toward an understanding of social structure and social action (Lin 1990a, 1990b). First, research on social resources has offered the plausibility that under structural constraints, individual choices (in terms of social ties and social contacts) may yield different and meaningful consequences. It has been shown that given two individuals with similar personal resources (including original social positions), they might experience different outcomes in instrumental actions, depending on social re-

sources they access and use. To an extent such different access is dictated by structural constraints. As mentioned earlier, original position affects the range of social ties in the social hierarchy and therefore the likelihood of accessing better social resources. However, after such structural constraints have been taken into account, there is evidence that some flexibility remains in the choice of social ties and use of social resources, and such choice and use yield meaningful and different results.

Second, much of past research on social structure as well as social resources has assumed that social structure has a priori existence and imposes constraints within which individuals conduct meaningful actions. The theoretical possibility that individual actions and choices may constitute fundamental driving forces in the formation and functioning of social structures has gained currency in sociology (Coleman 1986, 1988, 1990). Social resources, it is argued, may also contribute to this theoretical formulation.

One may assume that individuals strive to gain resources for the promotion and maintenance of one’s survival and well-being. Personal resources may be preferred to social resources in this striving, since the former incur less cost and are more manipulatable. However, the speed of cumulation may differ for the two types of resources. Acquisition and cumulation of personal resources may be additive. On the other hand, acquisition and cumulation of social resources may be exponential, in that once a social tie is established, not only the tie’s personal resources become social resources to ego, but the tie’s social resources (through its ties) also become social resources. Thus, social ties, through their networking patterns and dynamics, accelerate one’s social resources. While social resources come at a cost, as discussed earlier, it is to the benefit of ego to acquire as much social resources as possible. Thus, social resources constitute the fundamental motivation to networking in the promotion and maintenance of one’s selfinterest and well-being. Such networking constitutes the elementary blocks in the emergence of social structure. Subsequently, the management and manipulation of the constructed and extended network that contains increasingly heterogeneous participants with varying demands for secondary resources (e.g., quality of life considerations) dictate the development of hierarchical positions and

role expectations, which in turn reduce the range of possible individual action choices. Further theoretical work along these lines promises to contribute to the current interest and debate in the interrelationships between social actions and social structure.

(SEE ALSO: Exchange Theory; Social Network Theory; Social

Support)

REFERENCES

Barbieri, Paolo 1997 ‘‘The Hidden Treasure. A Map of the Social Capital in a Metropolitan Area’’ (Il Tesoro nascosto. La mappa del capitale sociate in un’area metropolitana) Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia 38:343–370.

Beggs, John J., and Jeanne S. Hurlbert 1997 ‘‘The Social Context of Men’s and Women’s Job Search Ties: Membership in Voluntary Organization, Social Resources, and Job Search Ourcomes.’’ Sociologcial Perspectives 40:601–622.

Boxman, E. A. W., Hendrik D. Flap, and P.M. De Graaf 1990 ‘‘Social Capital, Human Capital, and Income Attainment: the Impact of Social Capital and Human Capital on the Income Attainment of Dutch Managers in 1986.’’ Paper presented at the European Conference on Social Network Analysis, June, Groningen, Netherlands.

Boxman, E. A. W., and Hendrik D. Flap 1990 ‘‘Social Capital and Occupational Chances.’’ Paper presented at the International Sociological Association, XIIth World Congress of Sociology, July, Madrid.

Breiger, Ronald L. 1990 Social Mobility and Social Structure. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell, Karen E., Peter V. Marsden and Jeanne S. Hulbert, 1986 ‘‘Social Resources and Socioeconomic Status,’’ Social Networks, 8(1):97–116.

Coleman, James S 1986 Individual Interests and Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

———1988. ‘‘Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital,’’ American Journal of Sociology 94(Supple- ment):S95–S120.

———1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

De Graaf, Nan Dirk, and Hendrik Derk Flap 1988 ‘‘With a Little Help from My Friends,’’ Social Forces 67- 2:452–472.

Ensel, Walter M 1979 ‘‘Sex, Social Ties, and Status Attainment.’’ Ph.D. diss., Department of Sociology, State University of New York at Albany.

Flap, Hendrik D. and Nan Dirk DeGraaf 1988 ‘‘Social Capital and Attained Occupational Status,’’ Netherlands Journal of Sociology.

Green, Gary P., Leann M. Tigges, and Irene Browne 1995 ‘‘Social Resources, Job Search, and Poverty in Atlanta.’’ Research in Community Sociology 5:161–182.

Granovetter, Mark 1973 ‘‘The Strength of Weak Ties.’’

American Journal of Sociology 78:1360–1380.

———1974 Getting a Job. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

———1982 ‘‘The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited.’’ In Peter V. Marsden and Nan Lin, eds., Social Structure and Network Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Kulik, Liat 1997 ‘‘Anticipated Dependence: A Determinant in an Integrative Model of Power Relations among Elderly Couples.’’ Journal of Aging Studies 11:363–377.

Lai, Gina Wan-foon, Shu-yin Leung, and Nan Lin 1990 ‘‘Network Resources, Contact Resources, and Status Attainment: Structural and Action Effects of Social Resources.’’ Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, August, Washington, D.C.

——— 1998. ‘‘Network Resources, Contact Resources, and Status Attainment.’’ Social Networks 20:159–178.

Lin, Nan 1982 ‘‘Social Resources and Instrumental Action.’’ In Peter V. Marsden and Nan Lin, eds., Social Structure and Network Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.

———1983 ‘‘Social Resources and Social Actions: A Progress Report.’’ Connections 6:10–16.

———1986 ‘‘Conceptualizing Social Support.’’ In Nan Lin, Alfred Dean, and Walter M. Ensel, eds., Social Support, Life Events, and Depression. Orlando, Fla.: Academic Press.

———1990a ‘‘Social Resources and Social Mobility: A Structural Theory of Status Attainment,’’ In Ronald Breiger, ed., Social Mobility and Social Structure. New York: Cambridge University Press.

———1990b ‘‘Social Resources and the Emergence of Social Structure,’’ Paper presented at the XII World Congress of Sociology, July, Madrid.

———and Yan-jie Bian 1990 ‘‘Getting Ahead in Urban China: Differential Effects of Social Connections (Guanxi).’’ Paper presented at the Sunbelt Network Conference, February, San Diego.

———, and Mary Dumin 1986 ‘‘Access to Occupations through Social Ties.’’ Social Networks 8:365–385.

———, Walter M. Ensel, and John C. Vaughn 1981 ‘‘Social Resources and Strength of Ties: Structural