Basic and Applied Sociological Work: Divergence,Convergence,or Peaceful Co-existence?

Abstract

The linkages and barriers between basic and applied sociological work are examined. Basic sociology is defined as "discipline oriented" and applied sociology is defined as "'client oriented.'" These orientations are compared on three dimensions: goals, working norms, and reference groups. Possible linkages between the two sociologies are examined through two questions: (1) what relevance do the products of basic research have for applied work; and (2) how is the training necessary for basic research relevant to applied skills? A review of policy and evaluation research literature indicates that social science research findings have an indirect impact upon decision makers while the testimony of applied sociologists places heavy emphasis upon the importance of methodology and statistics. The relationship between a study's methodological and statistical sophistication and its utilization, however, appears to be inverse. Sociological theory has played a minor role in the training for and conduct of applied work, though the need for a theory of application is often cited by those concerned with the formation of public policy. Three scenarios are offered that suggest possible trends in the relationship between basic and applied sociology.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aaron, H. J. Politics and the professors: The Great Society in perspective. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1978.

Alkin, M. C. , Daillak, R. , & White, P. Using evaluation: Does evaluation make a difference? Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1979.

Caplan, N. A minimal set of conditions necessary for the utilization of social science knowledge in policy formulations at the national level. In C. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977. Pp. 183-197.

Coleman, J. Policy research in the social sciences. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press, 1972.

Collins, S. M. The use of social research in the courts. In L. Lynn (Ed.), Knowledge and policy: The uncertain connection. New York: Elsevier, 1978. Pp. 145-183.

Gouldner, A. W. , & Miller, S. M. (Eds.). Applied sociology: Opportunities and problems. New York: The Free Press, 1965.

Horowitz, I. L. (Ed.). Constructing policy: Dialogues with social scientists in the national political arena. New York: Praeger, 1979.

Knorr, K. D. Policymakers' use of social science knowledge: Symbolic or instrumental? In C. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977. Pp. 165-182.

Komarovsky, M. (Ed.). Sociology and public policy: The case of presidential commissions. New York: Elsevier, 1975.

10.

Larsen. O. N. The commission on obscenity and pornography: Forum, function, and failure. In M. Komarovsky (Ed.), Sociology and public policy: The case of presidential commissions. New York: Elsevier, 1975. Pp. 9-41.

11.

Levine, M. Scientific method and the adversary model. The American Psychologist, 1974, 29, 661-677.

12.

Lindbolm, C. E. , & Cohen, D. K. Usable knowledge: Social science and social problem solving. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1979.

13.

Ohlin, L. E. The president's commission on law enforcement and administration of justice. In M. Komarovsky (Ed.), Sociology and public policy: The case of presidential commissions. New York: Elsevier, 1975. Pp. 93-115.

14.

Panian, S. K. , & DeFleur, M. L. Sociologists in non-academic employment. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association, 1976.

15.

Patton, M. Q. , Grimes, P. S. , Guthrie, K. M. , Brennan, N. J. , French, B. D. , & Blyth, D. A. In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In C. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977. Pp. 141-163.

16.

Rich, R. F. Uses of social science information by federal bureaucrats: Knowledge for action versus knowledge for understanding. In C. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977. Pp. 199-211.

17.

Rosen, P. L. Social science and judicial policy making. In C. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977. Pp. 109-123.

18.

Rossi, P. The presidential address: The challenge and opportunities of applied social research. A merican Sociological Review, 1980, 45, 889-904.

19.

Rossi, P. , & Wright, S. Evaluation research: An assessment of theory, practice, and politics. Evaluation Quarterly, 1977, 1, 5-52.

20.

Scott, R. A. , & Shore, A. R. Why sociology does not apply: A study of the use of sociology in public policy. New York: Elsevier, 1979.

21.

Short, J. F., Jr. The national commission on the causes and prevention of violence: The contributions of sociology and sociologists. In M. Komarovsky (Ed.), Sociology and public policy: The case of presidential commissions. New York: Elsevier, 1975. Pp. 61-91.

22.

Shostak, A. B. (Ed.). Putting sociology to work. New York: David McKay, 1974.

23.

Sundquist, J. L. Research brokerage: The weak link. In L. Lynn (Ed.), Knowledge and policy: The uncertain connection. New York: Elsevier, 1978. Pp. 126-144.

24.

van de Vall, M. , & Bolas, C. Applied social discipline research or social policy research. The American Sociologist, 1980, 15, 128-137.

25.

Weber, G. H. , & McCall, G. J. (Eds.). Social scientists as advocates: Views from the applied disciplines. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1978.

26.

Weiss, C. H. , & Bucuvalas, M. J. Truth tests and utility tests: Decision-makers' frames of reference for social science research. American Sociological Review, 1980, 45, 302-313.