Skip to main content Accessibility help

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.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-30T21:43:40.803Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

7 - Professionalization, Scientific Expertise, and Elitism: A Sociological Perspective

from PART II - OVERVIEW OF APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF EXPERTISE – BRIEF HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS OF THEORIES AND METHODS

By
Julia Evetts ,
Harald A. Mieg  and
Ulrike Felt
Edited by
K. Anders Ericsson ,
Neil Charness ,
Paul J. Feltovich  and
Robert R. Hoffman
Julia Evetts
Affiliation:
School of Sociology & Social Policy, University of Nottingham
Harald A. Mieg
Affiliation:
Geographisches Institut, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
Ulrike Felt
Affiliation:
Institut für Wissenschaftsforschung, Universität Wien
K. Anders Ericsson
Affiliation:
Florida State University
Neil Charness
Affiliation:
Florida State University
Paul J. Feltovich
Affiliation:
University of West Florida
Robert R. Hoffman
Affiliation:
University of West Florida
Get access

Summary

Introduction

A key principle of sociology is that the lives of individuals cannot be understood without considering the social contexts in which the individuals live. Sociology is both a science and humanistic discipline that examines explanations based on structure, culture, discourse, and action dimensions in order to understand and interpret human behavior, beliefs, and expectations. This chapter will therefore examine the social contexts for, and different interpretations of, expertise, particularly within the context of professional work, science, and politics.

From a psychological point of view, expertise may be studied without respect to social contexts (Feltovich, Prietula, & Ericsson, Chapter 4). In contrast to this, sociology concerns itself with contextual conditions of the development of expertise and its functions in modern societies. From a sociological point of view, expertise and experts are relational notions: to be an expert always means to be an expert in contrast to nonexperts, that is, to laypersons (see also Mieg, Chapter 41). The dichotomy between experts and laypersons often implies not only a gradient of expertise, but also gradients in other social dimensions, such as prestige, privileges, and power. Sociological propositions about experts and expertise generally refer to this dichotomy.

Section One of this chapter deals with professions as the main form of an institutionalization of expertise in industrialized countries, the most prominent being lawyers and the medical profession. As we will see, professions can be analyzed as a generic group of occupations based on knowledge and expertise, both technical and tacit.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance , pp. 105 - 124
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Allsop, J., & Mulcahy, L. (1996). Regulating medical work: Formal and informal controls. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Annandale, E. (1998). The sociology of health and medicine. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C. (1989). Shaping written knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Bornschier, V. (1989). Legitimacy and comparative success at the core of the world system. European Sociological Review, 5(3), 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornschier, V. (1996). Western society in transition. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Buchner-Jeziorska, A. (2001). Price of knowledge: the market of intellectual work in Poland in the 90s. Paper presented in Professions Network of SASE Conference, Amsterdam, June 28–July 1.Google Scholar
Buchner-Jeziorska, A., & Evetts, J. (1997). Regulating professionals: The Polish example. International Sociology, 12(1), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burchell, G., Gordon, C., & Miller, P. (Eds.). (1991). The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlton, E. (1996). The few and the many: A typology of elites. Brookfield, VT: Scolar Press.Google Scholar
Carr-Saunders, A. M., & Wilson, P. A. (1933). The professions. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, D., Lowe, A., Puxty, A., Robson, K., & Willmott, H. (1988). Regulating the U.K. accountancy profession: Episodes in the relation between the profession and the state. Paper presented at ESRC Conference on Corporatism at the Policy Studies Institute, London, January 1988.
Crompton, R. (1990). Professions in the current context. Work, Employment and Society, Special Issue, 147–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daston, L. J. (1992). Objectivity and the escape from perspective. Social Studies of Science, 22, 597–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, C. (1995). Gender and the professional predicament in Nursing. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Dietz, T. M., & Rycroft, R. W. (1987). The risk professionals. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Dingwall, R., (1996). Professions and social order in a global society. Plenary presentation at ISA Working Group 02 Conference, Nottingham, 11–13 September.
Dingwall, R., & Lewis, P. (Eds.). (1983). The sociology of the professions: Doctors, lawyers and others. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dogan, M. (1989). Pathways to power: Selecting rulers in pluralist democracies. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Dubar, C. (2000). La crise des identités: L'interprétation d'une mutation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Durkheim, E. (1992). Professional ethics and civic morals. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Elias, N. (1982). The civilizing process, Vol. II: Power and civility. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Etzioni, A. (1969). The semi-professionals and their organization: Teachers, nurses and social workers. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Etzioni-Halevy, E. (1993). The elite connection: Problems and potential of western democracy. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Etzioni-Halevy, E. (1999). Inequality and the quality of democracy in ultramodern society. International Review of Sociology, 9(2), 239–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etzioni-Halevy, E. (2001). Elites: Sociological aspects. In Smelser, N. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 4420–4424). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Evetts, J., & Dingwall, R. (2002). Professional occupations in the UK and Europe: Legitimation and governmentality. International Review of Sociology, 12 (2), 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evetts, J. (1998). Analysing the projects of professional associations: National and international dimensions. Unpublished paper presented at ISA Congress, Montreal, 26 July – 1 August.
Evetts, J. (2001). Professions in European and UK markets: The European professional federations. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 20 (11/12), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evetts, J. (2003). Professionalization and professionalism: Explaining professional performance initiatives. In Mieg, H. A. & Pfadenhauer, M. (Eds.), Professionelle Leistung – Professional Performance: Positionen der Professionssoziologie (pp. 49–69). Konstanz: UVK.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1978). Science in a free society. London: NLB.Google Scholar
Fournier, V. (1998). Stories of development and exploitation: Militant voices in an enterprise culture. Organization, 5(1), 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fournier, V. (1999). The appeal to professionalism as a disciplinary mechanism. Social Review, 47(2), 280–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freidson, E. (1982). Occupational autonomy and labor market shelters. In Steward, P. L. & Cantor, M. G. (Eds.), Varieties of work (pp. 39–54). Beverley Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Freidson, E. (1988 [1970]). Profession of medicine: A study in the sociology of applied knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Freidson, E. (1994). Professionalism reborn: Theory, prophecy and policy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The third logic. London: Polity.Google Scholar
Frenkel, S., Korczynski, M., Donoghue, L., & Shire, K. (1995). Re-constituting work: Trends towards knowledge work and info-normative control. Work, Employment and Society, 9(4), 773–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadea, C. (Ed.). (2003). Sociologie des cadres et sociologie des professions: Proximités et paradoxes. Knowledge, Work & Society, 1, 1.Google Scholar
Gieryn T. (1995). Boundaries of science. In Jasanoff, S., Markle, G. E., Petersen, J. C., & Pinch, T. (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 393–443). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, R., & Lachman, R. (1996). Change as an underlying theme in professional service organizations: An introduction. Organization Studies, 17(4), 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grelon, A. (1996). Ingenieurs et risques technologiques dans la chimie industrielle en France. Paper presented at ISA Working Group 02 Conference, Nottingham, 11–13 September.
Grey, C. (1994). Career as a project of the self and labour process discipline. Sociology, 28, 479–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, T. C. (1987). Beyond monopoly: Lawyers, state crises and professional empowerment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hanlon, G. (1998). Professionalism as enterprise: Service class politics and the redefinition of professionalism. Sociology, 32(1), 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanlon, G. (1999). Lawyers, the state and the market: Professionalism revisited. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haraway, D. (1989). Primate visions: Gender, race and nature in the world of modern science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. (1999). Clinical autonomy and health policy: Past and futures. In Exworthy, M. & Halford, S. (Eds.), Professionals and the new managerialism in the public sector. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, S., & Ahmad, W. (2000). Medical autonomy and the UK state 1975 to 2005. Sociology, 34(1), 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, K. (Ed.). (1992). The uses of discretion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hiremath, S. L., & Gudagunti, R. (1998). Professional commitment among Indian executives. Paper presented at ISA Congress Montreal, July 26–Aug 1.
Hughes, E. C. (1958). Men and their work. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Imhof, K., & Romano, G. (1994). Die Diskontinuität der Moderne. Zur Theorie des sozialen Wandels [The discontinuity of modernity: On the theory of social change]. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus.Google Scholar
Johnson, T. (1972). Professions and power. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Karpik, L. (1989). Le désintéressement. Annales, Economies Socitétés Civilisations, 3 (May–June), 733–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kolabinska, M. (1912). La circulation des élites en France. Lausanne: Imp. réunies.Google Scholar
Larkin, G. (1983). Occupational monopoly and modern medicine. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Larson, M. S. (1977). The rise of professionalism. Barkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986 [1979]). Laboratory life. The (social) construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Lerner, R., Nagai, A. K., & Rothman, S. (1996). American elites. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lyotard, J. F. (1984). The post-modern condition: A report on knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
MacDonald, K. M. (1995). The sociology of the professions. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class and other essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McClellend, C. E. (1990). Escape from freedom? Reflections on German professionalization 1870–1933. In Torstendahl, R. & Burrage, M. (Eds.), The formation of professions: Knowledge, state and strategy (pp. 97–113). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Mechanic, D. (1991). Sources of countervailing power in medicine. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 16, 485–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Members of the first and second Committees on Women Faculty in the School of Science (1999). A study of the status of women faculty in science at MIT, to be found at http://web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.html.
Merton, R. K. (1973 [1942]). The normative structure of science. In Storer, N. W. (Ed.), The sociology of science (pp. 267–278). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Michels, R. (1915). Political parties. New York: Hearst's International Library.Google Scholar
Milburn, P. (1996). Les territoires professionnels et la négociation experte du réel: Compatibilité des modèles théoriques. Paper presented at ISA Working Group 02 Conference, Nottingham, 11–13 September.
Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990). Governing economic life. Economy and Society, 19(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mosca, G. (1939). The ruling class. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Mulkay, M. (1976). Norms and ideology in science. Social Science Information, 15, 637–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, R. (1988). Social closure: The theory of monopolization and exclusion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Nollert, M. (2000). Lobbying for a Europe of big business: The European roundtable of industrialists. In Bornschier, V. (Ed.), State-building in Europe: The revitalization of Western European integration (pp. 187–209). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olgiati, V., Orzack, L. H., & Saks, M. (Eds.). (1998). Professions, identity and order in comparative perspective. Onati: The International Institute for the Sociology of Law.Google Scholar
Pareto, V. (1935). The mind and society: A treatise on general sociology (ed. by A. Livingstone). New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co. Google Scholar
Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Perkin, H. (1988). The rise of professional society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reed, M. (1996). Expert power and control in late modernity: An empirical review and theoretical synthesis. Organization Studies, 17(4), 573–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, H. (1994). Love, power and knowledge: Towards a feminist transformation of the sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Saks, M. (1995). Professions and the public interest. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sautu, R. (1998). The effect of the marketization of the Argentine economy on the labor market: Shifts in the demand for university trained professionals. Paper presented at ISA Congress, Montreal, July 26–Aug 1.
Schiebinger, L. (1989). The mind has no sex?: Women in the origins of modern science. Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. (1985). Leviathan and the air-pump. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Svensson, L. (2003). Market, management and Professionalism: Professional work and changing organisational contexts. In Mieg, H. A. & Pfadenhauer, M. (Eds.), Professionelle Leistung – Professional Performance: Positionen der Professionssoziologie (pp. 313–355). Konstanz: UVK.Google Scholar
Tawney, R. H. (1921). The acquisitive society. New York: Harcourt Bruce.Google Scholar
Trépos, J. (1996). Une modelisation des jugements d'experts: Catégories et instruments de mesure. Paper presented at ISA Working Group 02 Conference, Nottingham, 11–13 September.
Turner, S. (2001). What is the problem with experts? Social Studies of Science, 31(1), 123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M. (1979). Economy and society (trans. by G. Roth & C. Wittich). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wilensky, H. L. (1964). The professionalization of everyone? The American Journal of Sociology, 70(2), 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenneras, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer review. Nature, 387, 341–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wynne, B. (1995). Public understanding of science. In Jasanoff, S., Markle, G. E., Petersen, J. C., & Pinch, T. (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 361–388). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, H., Cole, J., & Bruer, J. (Eds.). (1991). The outer circle: Women in the scientific community. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Greenwood, E. (1957). Attributions of a profession. Social Work, 2, 44–55.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×