STATUS ENCQNSISTENEY, EQUAL MOBELITY, AND EQLH'ECG=ECQNQMEC QREENTATEQNS AMONG A SAMPLE GF NNEC’R CCLLEGE ENSTEUCTQES meats {Cor Hm Dogma of DH. D. MICHIGAN STATE UREVEESITY Marvin D. Leavy £968 in LIBRARY . Michigan Scat: THESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled STATUS INCONSISTENCY, SOCIAL MOBILITY, AND POLITICO- ECONOMIC ORI ENTATIONS AMONG A SAMPLE OF JUNIOR COLLEGE INSTRUCTORS presented by MARVIN D. LEAW has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. degree in SOCIOLOGY v / ajor professor / I .Tav W Arfi: DateM_e_§ 0-169 " .‘ ...~ \.a¢J__, L A»'\~.~y~ . _ l'vvvvs- ‘W_L A ‘7’, . ‘— Vi. v‘--. . ‘f'u fi v -‘J..U _ _ -‘ ._ “' b.1‘ _ I I 2"P~ . ““r‘ -.L_ - I ‘FY ‘ o . A..-§ “i_‘_ ‘ A '~ " r .I "V‘. vs ’wwaf _" I'M . ‘ ‘ .~\-~ ~r:~ . ‘S - h H- VU“‘*\— '— .~"~~~ -.: 'y ., ‘ "\. “y‘ \“ '\ d ‘~’ “‘k I. , \— \ hr,‘ ,1 B.L,_‘ [K‘- g ' 1.“ ~ ~ ~‘.‘ n rm 7' ‘. n. I.“ d . . “;- \_ 9qu ‘ N_« k‘ \ an ~t STATUS INCONSIS'I‘ENCY, SOCIAL MOBILITY, AND POLITICO—ECONOMIC ORIENTATIONS AMONG A SAMPLE OF JUNIOR COLLEGE INSTRUCTORS by Marvin D. Leavy This research investigates the comparative and joint effects of inconsistency of rank on various hier— archies of status evaluation (ethnic origin,Leducation, \\occupation, and\income) and of vertical social mobility on these hierarchies upon an individual's political opin- ions regarding economic issues. As such, it is focused at the microscopic level—~the specification of the additive and interactive effects of these formal status attributes for individuals——rather than the macroscopic characteriza- tion of a social system in terms of the societal conse- quences of the incidence of status inconsistency and social mobility. Much recent research literature supports the ex- pectation that an inconsistent status profile (in partic- ular, one_of high rank on salient achievement criteria and low rank on salient ascribed criteria) for an indi- l vidual tends to more often induce a more ”liberal" politico— Eeconomic value orientation than does a profile consistently Ihigh. Other research findings indicate that significant increases in educational, occupational, and income levels n " ‘ ' » Q?”V1"."‘.‘ I-AV 1.5»‘4‘ LA " . .1 ‘, \yvba V“’ fAO.“V"“f‘" ; , r. ..- t ..V thaV— . I . . n , ‘fl1-'n"-i I 4.;‘ufii -v’a ( l (I (A L. p- l 0' U" (I) (‘1' (_\ A n..- _, tr,“ a‘ UL V's-hvra A: ' I ‘o— - *_ . O f“-v\ ,- ‘I, ,. . v-‘ < ‘Jqfi‘ c .‘y 3 a_“ r“ ‘1“ v‘ r.A “ \rv...‘ '§ -, \k‘ ‘ 4 my" . M 's ‘9 \ Marvin D. Leavy intergenerationally or individually tend to induce in an individual greater ”conservatism” on politico-economic mat- ters than found among both initial status cohort and (more noteworthy) among those who have inter-generationally or individually maintained equivalent attained ranks. With- out developing in great detail the backdrop of varying so- cietal rates of status inconsistency and social mobility, a set of postulates is introduced and the following the- oretical hypotheses are developed whereby varying degrees of politico—economic ”liberalism” are associated with in- dividuals' social mobility and consistency profile: 1. The (inter—generationally or individually) non-mobile at high achievement statuses register greater politico—economic liberal— ism than do the upward—mobile to these high achievement statuses. 2. The status inconsistent at high achievement statuses register greater politico—economic liberalism than do the status consistent at these same levels. 3. The stable (non—mobile) at high achievement statuses who remain status inconsistent (Set 3) register greater politico-economic lib- eralism than do the upward-mobile to these same statuses who attain status consistency (Set 2). 4. The upward-mobile to high achievement levels who in the process have become status in- consistent (Set 1) will not significantly differ from the stable (non-mobile) who re- main status consistent (Set 4) in the regis— tering of politico-economic liberalism. A stratified random sample of eighty-three male junior college instructors (uniformly if not perfectly crystallized in their levels of education, income, and Ix ~ I‘ __ “a c u x; b J Y‘QY‘ /‘ 1 : diva-E v-Lv .., a . . vf‘V‘fi .. v lag- ~J A- ’“xs ._,, —--1, \rh-A “‘- H 1.] ,_ v»\a..-l. -H -3, __ , V"“v v—«_ a)... ' . \ ..“ .. ”V b-‘~_ v‘ vs, 1 F'- 1"“.‘)_‘7 ‘ F ' V I . J~*‘_ .,.,‘L ' I . ..1,.__ ~° '7‘, ..H' A ’_ ~_ ' ‘v.__‘ .. . 'K L. < , 4 s ’2‘: \. J "A ‘ ..~ ~ .‘ ‘ ._ “-4 “ v ‘ ‘ L -_‘< A -. w -J _ ~~‘_‘ _"- . ‘ ..._‘ '7 ”r.;_ . ‘ _ 47.. ., ' ..~‘__ . ‘M #A \‘ t‘h ‘ ‘W . _‘ “ r ..‘V‘ » . 17‘ ‘~u4.' \~-_ « s ‘A v . x.” I. - ‘\ 1‘ "I; ‘ x 9 F‘.‘ .. ‘~ \ Marvin D. Leavy occupational prestige) was selected from three Public Junior Colleges in middle—sized, industrialized Michigan cities. From self-administered questionnaires, these instructors were classified as Status Consistent or Inconsistent (with ethnic group prestige the pivotal determinant) and as Up— ward Mobile or Stable. The differentiating power of the resultant four—fold distinction for direction of politico- economic belief (as tapped by six-item Likert-type scale constructed from existing scales) was then investigated. The Mobility Hypothesis (1) is not supported by statistical analysis of the evidence: differences in politico—economic liberalism between the Non—Mobile and Mobile are non—significant. A Hypothesis of no difference must be rejected, however, for the degree of liberalism between the Status Inconsistent and Consistent instructors (2, p < .03). The Third Hypothesis posits additive effects of Non-mobility and Status Inconsistency. This is confirmed but the significance of the total chi—square (p < .05) is due to the Inconsistency variable, there being no inter- active effects. The null hypothesis (Hypothesis 4) of moderating politico—economic effects for the two residual, inter—mediate sets is not rejected. In interpreting these results, stress is laid upon pruning or, where necessary, elaborating upon the theoret- ical framework. Consistency profile differentiates the likely politico—economic orientation upon upward mobility. Possibility of more parsimonious explanation of the Status . ... -a p—‘ .J‘ '4—‘vb « t : ..-.~o- b~~vt . 'l q -"f‘ aux; V‘f‘ ,‘vy-.~\. . .u~.,- ‘ . . uv. ..J "‘ ‘A'uy ”‘~v‘( . ifl,‘ .,_ ‘0 ‘._, J- a u >-A'Y"‘ -_..,_,_" .. I- ”h,‘ -_ Marvin D. Leavy Inconsistency results is discussed as are research strat- egies to refine the concept for future crucial research test. Comparison of Achievement level (Class), Ethnicity, and "Ethclass" perspectives in accounting for variance in politico—economic orientation is suggested and strategies devised to test their respective value. After briefly discussing the salience of future politico—economic opin- ion research, the thesis concludes by urging recognition of the macro-scopic context in the micro—scopic formula- tions of the behavioral effects of status profiles of rank discrepancy and mobility. STATUS INCONSISTSNCY, SOCIAL MOBILITY, AND POLITICO—ECONOMIC ORIENTATIONS AMONG A SAMPLE or JUNIOR COLLEGE INSTRUCTORS By 0 ‘ ‘ I MarVin D. Leavy Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Sociology 1968 vsno-‘ « _- - 6 1“ J F? ,4. " “Moi", (“5. I J . l .9- ’/:‘ ; .Vr/a? I ,v I ACKNOWL EDGME NT S The opportunity to acknowledge the aid and coop— eration given me throughout this study is a welcome one. The research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant 63—1878 for Improving Doctoral Dissertation Research and indeed this financial assistance did enable me to con— duct the analysis more completely and rapidly. To the Junior College instructors whose participa- tion was so graciously accorded, I am especially thankful. I have found that their willingness to contribute to schol— arly understanding corroborates my past experience with members of this profession. In that sense, this sample was representative. Dr. Jay Artis, as Chairman of my doctoral commit— tee, deserves special recognition. His encouragement of the research and provision of clerical resources was only an extension of the stabilizing guidance he has rendered throughout my graduate program. Dr. William Faunce gave detailed criticisms of the prospectus of this thesis which clarified the path of my investigation. Two other members of the committee, Drs. Hideya Kumata and Harry Webb, are each due notes of appreciation. ii A word of thanks is due Mr. Chuck Poland, whose close consultation in fitting statistical analyses to com- puter programs was vital. I also wish to thank Mrs. Carol Meister and Mrs. Shirley Brown for their close attention to detail in the typing of first and final draftings of the dissertation respectively. Finally, to my wife Sally, no words can quite ade— quately express my indebtedness for her special brand of support in the arduous path to this goal. iii -.Lc .31. . ll‘li TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. OVERVIEW OF THE PROBLEM. . . . . . . . . . . . l xA. Introduction: Identification of the Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l \l. Status Inconsistency 2. Social Mobility 3. Politico-Economic Orientation B. Purposes of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 9 V.C. The Format of Presentation. . . . . . . . 13 II. THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. . . . . . . . . . . 20 A. Theoretical Hypothesis I: Research \ Support in Social Mobility. . . . . . . . 20 ‘vB. Theoretical Hypothesis II: Research Support in Status Inconsistency . . . . . 26 C. Hypotheses of Additive and Interactive Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 1. Theoretical Hypothesis III 2. Theoretical Hypothesis IV D. Axiomatic Theory: Postulates, Theorems, and Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 III. THE DESIGN OF RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 A. The Research Population: Sampling Design 46 B. The Conceptualization and Operationaliza— tion of Variables: Nominal and Ordinal Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 “w 1. Status Consistency and Inconsis— tency: A Nominal Calculus Ethnic Group Status Indices of Achievement Status 2. Social Mobility Intergenerational Conceptions of Mobility Career Mobility 3. The Measurement of Politico-Economic Orientation C. The Logic of Proof and Statistical Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 D. Procedures of the Inquiry . . . . . . . . 7O ‘7 y- r.‘_"\'- lea'th' b Chapter IV. THE RESULTS AND THEIR ANALYSIS. . . . . . . E. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Mobility and Politico-Economic Liberalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Status Inconsistency and Politico— Economic Liberalism. . . . . . . . . . Additive and Interactive Effects . . . Some Further Analyses. . . . . . . . . V. THE INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS. . . . . . . A. B. \\‘ C 0 Summary of Findings. . . . . . . . . . Theoretical Reconsiderations of Social Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Theoretical Alternatives to Status Inconsistency: Research Strategies toward Conceptual Clarification. . . . l. Associational Saliencies. . . . . 2. The Ethclass Formulation 3. Ethnicity versus Status Incon— sistency 4. Essential Controls: Religion and Generation The Course of Politico—Economic Opinion Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Inter—penetration of Macro- and Micro-Scopic Levels in Theoretic Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . REFERENCE BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES. O O O O O O C C O O O O O C O O O C O Page 82 82 87 91 92 96 103 103 105 109 115 118 128 1-36 C... _ LIST OF TABLES Number of status inconsistent by specific ethnic identification by college . . . . . . . Maximum limits of father's position defining inter-generational mobility in education, income, and occupational prestige. . . . . . . Age distribution by college sub—sample . . . . Years taught by college sub—sample . . . . . . AFT membership by college sub—sample . . . . . Teaching field by college sub—sample . . . . . Politico-economic orientation by college sub- sample 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Status consistency profile by college sub— sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Career mobility and politico—economic liberal- ism. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Manual mobility and politico-economic liberal- ism. O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O 0 Mobility (education) and politico-economic liberalism C O O O O O O O O O O C C O O O C . Mobility (income) and politico—economic liberalism . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Mobility (occupational prestige) and politico— economic liberalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summated mobility and politico-economic liber- alism. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Status consistency profile and politico— economic liberalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Career mobility, status consistency profile, and politico—economic liberalism . . . . . . . vi 85 87 88 88 89 89 89 91 93 Table 4.15. Summated mobility, status consistency profile and politico—economic liberalism . . . . . . Manual mobility, status consistency profile, and politico—economic liberalism . . . . . . Percent liberal by consistency and mobility prOfile. O O O O O O I C O O O O O I I O ' 0 Age and politico—economic orientation. . . . Age and politico—economic orientation. . . . Status consistency profile and politico— economic orientation by ratio of older: younger instructors. . . . . . . . . . . . . American Federation of Teachers membership and politico—economic orientation. . . . . . . . Reactions to negative role evaluation by status consistency profile and politico— economic orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX E Type of high school attended and politico- economic liberalism. . . . . . . . . . . . . Years taught and politico-economic liberalism. Teaching field and politico—economic liberal- ism. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Residential background and politico—economic liberalism O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 vii Page 93 94 94 96 96 97 97 101 Page 148 148 148 148 LIST OF FIGURES Page Current Status Consistency Profile and Inter— Generational Mobility Experience of High Achievement Individuals by Ethnic Group Status and Father's Achieved (Education, Occupation, Income) Status Rank. . . . . . . . ll Inter-Generational Mobility and Status Con- sistency Profile of an Aggregate Uniform in High Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll Discrete Bifurcation of Mobility and Status Consistency Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Distribution of Politico-Economic Scores . . . 86 viii LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. Instructor's Questionnaire. . . . . . . . . . I36 8. Further Tests of Significance with Politico- Economic Liberalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 C. Scalogram Analysis Commentary . . . . . . . . 150 ix Opinions Althougn tiOnShi; CHAPTER I OVERVIEW OF THE PROBLEM Introduction Nearly fifteen years have elapsed since Lenski first suggested that a measure of "Status Crystallization" might have powerful explanatory value in differentiating persons of varying degrees of politico-economic Liberalism.l Lenski adduced evidence from a Detroit-area sample that a low degree of consistency (i.e., inconsistency) of rankings on "important" status indicators was associated with a tendency to give "liberal" responses to questions tapping opinions on (federal) governmental economic policies. Although some profiles clearly yielded more positive rela- tionships than others, Lenski documented his contention that this tendency held regardless of the profile of incon- sistency (when compared with all "high" crystallized re- spondents) of rank.3 Moreover, Lenski charged that this tendency was manifest regardless of the "overall" socio- economic Class level of respondent.4 Thus, it is depicted as a "non—vertical dimension of status rank." This seminal report has provoked much criticism, thinking, and investigation. A plethora of research efforts has sprung from introduction of this quantitative concept into th« Aside f. discuss. sociate cial pa} a few. ions vi: most cor sory suz consists many res thesis 1 related tremi Sm" emPlOyec would no into the sociological and socio-psychological lexicon.S Aside from the considerable semantic and methodological discussion it has raised,6 attempts have been made to as- sociate the phenomenon with suicide,7 mental stress,8 so- cial participation,9 and class consciousness10 to name but a few. However, it has been with regard to political opin- ions vis a vis the social order and social change that the most controversial debate has been generated. Even a cur- sory survey of research in this area will reveal that no consistent, consensual body of findings exists. There are many reasons for this. One of the major objectives of this thesis is to elucidate them. Rush, for example, found status inconsistency cor- related with extra-conservative opinion ("Right-Wing Ex- tremism") in his cross-sectional sample.ll Even h2g_he employed Lenski's criteria of status-rank, such a finding would not necessarily conflict with Lenski's, inasmuch as the relative frequency of both extreme polar (both more radically liberal agg_radically conservative) politico- economic orientations may be pronouncedly higher among those with discrepant ranks than those with consistent statuses.12 This observation immediately suggests that only specific configurations of inconsistency may carry the burden of liberal or conservative association, respec— tively. Kenkell3 quite early and Kelly and Chamblissl4 more recently have disputed the substance of Lenski's (and Goffman port fo an indi liefs. Kenkel' Lenski mizing failure compens Lenski less of - 16 lsm. Goffman's) contentions. Each has found no empirical sup- port for the linkage of disparate structural ranks with an individual's espousal of liberal politico-economic be- liefs. Lenski, in a celebrated defense, has replied that Kenkel's reliance upon two different status indicators than Lenski had used plus different "breaking points" dichoto- mizing the scorers were factors responsible for Kenkel's failure to confirm Lenski's results.15 Kelly and Chambliss compensated for this latter charge in their test of the Lenski thesis, however, and found no association, regard- less of "breaking point," with any of four types of liberal- ism.16 A methodological critique of Lenski's instrument (offered in Chapter III) buttresses the decision to set it aside in this research in favor of a simpler instrument of less questionable assumptions. For the moment, only one criticism will be made. Lenski's own specification of his original findings indicates that he has undoubtedly placed too much emphasis upon a monolithic conception of Status Inconsistency at the expense of particular profiles and their significantly different effect upon, and corre- lation with, behavioral and attitudinal variables. This concentration is certainly understandable at early, sensi- tizing stages of a concept's "career," but dogmatic debate regarding the consequences of status inconsistency regard- less of juxtaposition or contour of status ranks retards the controlled study of specific profiles upon which knowledge advances of statt I theoreti economicl erence ts (structt; reveals t to the ot eral and "PGVEd t: niGin-low Or OCCUpg 10w ethn witn hig resultec‘; eprESsi versely’ the C lowEst not Sigr 8:3.20 - , ..m l '1 advances. It is time to discover which particular profiles of status inconsistency (if any) reflecting determinative theoretical anchorages are associated with which politico- economic orientations. Any review of relevant research efforts with ref- erence to the linkage of individual status consistency (structurally objectified) with politico-economic opinions . reveals that "ethnicity" rank is critical in its relation to the other salient status indicators in polarizing Lib- eral and Conservative economic orientations.l7 Lenski "paved the way" for this conclusion in his comparison of high-low pairs (permutations of ethnic, educational, income, or occupational prestige rank) among the low status consis- tencyscorers.l8 These comparisons clearly showed that A low ethnic status (reputationally ascribed) in conjunction with higher income, occupation, and education respectively Lresulted in the strongest Democratic Party allegiance and 19 (expression of Liberal politico-economic opinion. Con- versely, high ethnic status in conjunction with lower ranks ion the other three criteria produced three of the four .lowest F scores in expression of Liberal opinion, in fact :(not significantly different than all high consistency scor- ers.20 Again, no controls for Social Class were presented. Findings of this sort have led Mitche1121 22 and Kelly ;and Chambliss among others to charge that low ethnic rank I’alone is responsible for the aggregate association of status } inconsistency with Liberalism.- Since Lenski's analYSiS is not cl low (rel: economic One burdz- cribed e: lance in tion of s of inter— rank sub; tO a coll resentatj 5 is not class controlled, no portrait of the consistently low (relatively low on all indicators) individual's politico- economic orientation emerges to "test" this allegation.23 One burden of this work will be to argue that, indeed, as- cribed ethnic prestige rank does ngt_explain the total var- iance in politico-economic opinion independent of a concep- tion of status inconsistency and the cross—cutting effects of inter—generational social mobility. Level of ethnic prestige is by definition not a rank subject to individual change (vertically). Ascribed to a collectivity and then stereotypically applied to "rep- resentatives" thereof, it is a status indicator of a dif- ferent order than individually achievable criteria of pres- 24 tige (viz., education, income, and occupation). This distinction between ascribed and achieved status-rank sug— ' gests two limiting case profiles which it will be theorized 25 In 2 yield distinctive politico-economic orientations. brief, low ascribed and high achieved (or maintained) stat- uses predispose Liberalism; high ascribed and low achieved (or maintained) statuses yield significantly lower liberal tendencies. Empirical corroboration of only the former of these theoretical hypotheses is attempted in this study. From the perspective of another body of research literature, that of the individual consequences of inter- generational social mobility, the relationship of one's disparateness of ranks to such ideological tendencies may 26 27 be illuminated. Lipset and Lipset and Bendix have summariz' of inter. orientat. evidence tain cave between ' be made. economic) whereas, sociated liDe; SUPpo the C summarized the results of research dealing with the impact of inter-generational occupational mobility upon political orientation and voting behavior. Prior to a review of this evidence, a task reserved for the following section, cer- tain caveats must be made. A sharp analytic distinction between "economic" and "non—economic" liberalism needs to be made. Lipset reports that "tolerance" on civil (non— economic) issues rises with general socio—economic position whereas, conversely, economic liberalism is negatively as— sociated with general socio-economic position: The poorer strata everywhere are more liberal or leftist on economic issues; they favor more wel- fare state measures, higher wages, graduated income taxes, support of trade unions, etc. But when liberalism is defined in non-economic terms—-as support of civil liberties, internationalism, etc.-- the correlation is reversed. The more well-to-do are more liberal, the poorer are more intolerant.28 Much data corroborate that high educational (and to a lesser extent, occupational) level is positively tied to non— economic liberalism almost regardless of general socio- economic position.29 Hereafter, "liberalism" and "con- servatism" will refer to politico—economic orientations unless otherwise specified. Briefly, available data pertaining to the personal consequences of vertical social mobility upon politico- economic beliefs are neither impressive nor conclusive. Varying conceptions of mobility hinder the accumulation and comparison of findings. Confined mainly to inter— generational occupational mobility reports, there is some evidence Britain, position both (a) upper an maintain For exarr Of LaboL evidence that the upward mobile (in the United States, Great Britain, and Australia) to upper and upper-middle status positions are more conservative on economic matters than both (a) their initial class cohorts, and (b) those matched upper and upper-middle status individuals who have "merely" maintained the levels of their "family of orientation."30 For example, they are less likely to register a Democratic or Labour Party preference than those in category (a) and, to a lesser degree, those in category (b) above.31 Down- ward social mobility (intergenerational) is quite conclu— sively tied to increasing politico-economic Conservatism in all industrialized countries for which data are avail- able.32 The dimension of politico-economic orientation treated in this work is termed "liberalism-conservatism"; the extreme poles respectively refer to two substantive, historically contingent clusters of opinions that reflect opposing positions of "preference-nonpreference" for cer- tain public (federal) supports to assure widespread eco- nomic opportunity and protection. (The substantive rather than formal is focused upon here.) In particular, the socio-psychological connotations of "change-mindedness" extremes (progressive preference for change versus main- tenance of existing conditions) often associated with these terms are n2£_being "measured" in this work (as shall be shown in Chapter III). Gradations between persons are presumed to exist on a continuum in this conception, however, measuren. construC‘ for wnic. position' r—d U) (l: ( l'l Assuran |- - - 151 film‘dm l P \a “N I—d v «1 U 1 - I“. ‘ \ °tlmulaf rrlvate atiVe Iii A-erltEV-lé aniSS;- ~ «~- ‘9 .z ! ‘ \. ‘WHEtne. C.V‘.'\"- J ssvtltd pro€;r ‘ sk~al K t ..L 5"? §§Otgfi’. .I. ‘\'¥ "fir? QV‘IKEIS \Sts \‘r P- c cfirsovll ¢r~ «Ate: (D {f‘ and a battery of questions designed to elicit an ordinal measurement of position in politico—economic orientation is constructed consistent with that premise. A list of issues for which discernably "liberal" or "conservative" value positions can be identified would include the following: ISSUE AREA I Assurance of Minimum Suste- nance as a Public Respon— sibility II Governmental Stimulation of Private Initi— ative III Maintenance of Indispensable Services (whether un- profitable or profitable) IV Protection of Workers' ests (Market- place and Personal Interests) Inter- LIBERAL ADHERENCE Support of Minimum Wage Laws Consideration of Guaranteed Annual Wage Proposals Support Principle of Tax—Subsidized Assistance to Poor Governmentally Ad- ministered Health, Old-Age Insurance Programs Federal Creation of Opportunities; Assurance of Equal- ity of Opportunity "Nationalization" where deemed neces— sary; oppose pri- vate concentrations of Market Control if Free Competition Hindered Stress upon Bene— fits derived by Labor Unionization Support of Profit— Sharing Plan Ex- tension to Workers CONSERVATIVE ADHERENCE Oppose Minimum Wage Laws Oppose Consideration of Annual Wage Minimums as Policy Do not favor Principle of Public Obligation (especially of gradu- ated taxation) Private Individual and Collective Preparation for Health and Old Age Needs Stress upon Private Initiative Sources; Deleterious Effects of "Welfare State" poli- cies upon initiative Free Competition by Private Enterprise; Support Private con— centrations if gained by this principle Stress upon Benefits derived from Recogni— tion of Owners' and Managers' Rights Opposition to Profit- Sharing Plan Extension to Workers of subst tions of ed theora diction . orientat; governmen veloped. theorems, additive ing) and izations Will be I Stain uS ch L . ““0 "inc: Purposes of the Study Placing in tandem theorems suggested from a base of substantive findings with reference to conceptualiza- tions of Status Inconsistency and Social Mobility, a ground- ed theoretic framework of explanatory utility for the pre- diction of their relative and dual impact upon individual's orientation (direction of opinion) regarding centralized governmental involvement in major economic issues is de- veloped. From an independent direction, a set of postulates, theorems, and hypotheses "covering" conditions wherein the additive or interactive effects of social mobility (ascend- ing) and status inconsistency as formal status character- izations of individuals33 can be deduced. These joint tasks will be reported in Chapter II. A four-fold taxonomy of status characterizations (created by dichotomizing these two "independent" variables) should yield high differenti- ating utility. Empirical confirmation of its heuristic utility is then sought. A research is here designed (set forth in Chapter III) to focus on the comparative effects (upon politico- economic opinion) of one major profile of positional con- sistency (high on three achieved and one ascribed dimension of status) and one major profile of positional inconsistency (high on the identical three achievement and low on the identical ascribed dimension) when each profile is the "outcome" of (intergenerational and/or individual) mobil- ity and immobility respectively.34 Difference between the two crys ascribe: as to tr status interge: tent in: of inco. this pr from a low on ’ LE. arc Ln: __ _-~ _ _ , --. ..--._-_ 10 two crystallization profiles pivots upon the (collectively) ascribed criterion of ethnic group repute. Assumptions as to this criterion's importance in the consequences of status inconsistency will be specified. Viewing mobility intergenerationally for the moment, positionally inconsis- tent individuals of this type may have maintained a profile of inconsistency (i.e., been immobile) while others within this profile may have attained it (i.e., been upward mobile) from a positionally consistent background unequivocally low on these criteria. Obviously, achievement criteria are the only ones on which an individual gag individual can register change.35 By the same token, persons recog- nized as belonging to a highly ranked ethnic group with correspondingly high rankings on achievement criteria (thus displaying positional consistency) may vary in their expe- rience of objectively marked mobility. Some have maintained this consistency profile (i.e., immobile) and some were reared in families with significantly lower achievement ranks (i.e., upwardly mobile) than ethnic group rank. Once status inconsistency profiles and intergenerational mobil- 36 the combination of ity patterns are thus dichotomized, possibilities just delineated for the members of an aggre- gate who are conceived to be profiled at uniformly high levels of achievement (relative to others rankable by the same criteria) is exhausted. Figures 1.1 and 1.2 illustrate this. FATHER' S nrwr-r-‘Vfif ..J A- hcfllb STATUS-R. ity will in the te that marr; {mt Enou; Politico: reSearch &‘ O Curlers 1n 2‘: L ."1 .IALR'S ‘ VT," 'A'.‘ -|J_- H u-) {LO}; ll ETHNIC GROUP STATUS LOW HIGH LOW i-Upward Mobile 2’Upward Mobile FATHER'S InconSistent ConSistent ACHIEVEMENT i, STATUS-RANK §_ 3_ HIGH Stable‘ Stable‘ Inconsistent Consistent Figure 1.1. Current Status Consistency Profile and Inter- Generational Mobility Experience of High Achievement Individuals by Ethnic Group Status and Father's Achieved (Education, Occupation, Income) Status-Rank ‘Those few experiencing significant downward mobil- ity will be analyzed separately from the Immobile (Stable) in the testing of hypotheses. First, it is not anticipated that many will fit criteria of downward mobility, i.e., not enough to significantly test a hypothesis of extreme politico—economic Conservatism for which there is strong research and theoretical justification (as opposed to the others in the Inter-generationally stable profiles). FATHER'S CONSISTENCY PROFILE SON'S ACHIEVED (SET) ASCRIBED MOBILITY - CONSISTENCY (Low 1 Low) ——e’ Upward . Mobile - InconSistent (Low 2 High) —-> Upward . Mobile - ConSistent (High 3 Low)-——+~ Stable - Inconsistent (High 4 High)-——a> Stable - Consistent Figure 1.2. Inter-generational Mobility and Status Con- sistency Profile of an Aggregate Uniform in High Achievement repute a bility e sistent file whe consiste This rev thesis t are "e 1 .K} tencies 571113 for ereCOg 12 When the Upward Mobile of High and Low Ethnic Group repute are compared, it is revealed that the former's mo- bility entailed an inter—generational shift from an incon- sistent (High ascribed; Low achieved) to a consistent pro- file whereas the latter's mobility entailed a shift (from consistent to inconsistent profile) quite the opposite. This reveals certain weaknesses in a "status equilibration" thesis that charges that structural inconsistencies gener- ate "equilibrating" tendencies and that structural consis- tencies are always inherently preferred.37 Figure 1.2 may more clearly portray this relation- ship for a situs relatively (and uniformly) high in social- ly recognized achievement (e.g., in occupational, educa- tional, and income prestige). It should become evident that Social Mobility (viewed individually as well as intergenerationally) and Status Inconsistency (as conceived)3%re the independent variables in this study and that (direction of) politico— economic opinion is viewed as the main dependent variable. lays the adumbrat- mobility are EEOC); are Press majOr fly; of the SI gestions 0713 doing C N- 13 The Format of Presentation This thesis will take on this format. Chapter II lays the theoretical groundwork for the hypotheses only adumbrated at this point. The empirical support in social mobility and status crystallization research is reviewed and a "middle-range" theory of postulates, theorems, and hypotheses is developed in this chapter. In Chapter III, the methodology of research design is laid out: the link- age of operations to the conceptual variables is specified; the logic of proof is stated and accompanied by the statis- tical techniques; finally, the procedures of the field work are reported. The results of this field work, the data, are presented in Chapter IV. An analysis to verify the major hypotheses of the study is reported. Implications of the study's findings are drawn out in Chapter V and sug- gestions are offered for theoretical refinement through ongoing strategies of research. FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER I 1. x6. Lenski, "Status Crystallization: A Non-Vertical 4. 5. ' Dimension of Social Status," American Sociological Review, 19 (August, 1954), pp. 405-413. 41bid. Concurrent here are the findings of I. Goffman, "Status Consistency and Preference for Change in Power Distribution," American Sociological Review, 22 (June, 1957), pp. 275-281. Lenski, op. cit., p. 411. Status Crystallization is viewed as the polar opposite of Status Inconsistency of ranks. A vital distinction must be made here be- tween "positional inconsistency" of status ranks and "status incongruence." The former denotes a structural discrepancy between ranks held on different objective criteria upon which an individual may be profiled. No teleological grounds for expecting equivalence of rank (either by the profiler or the profiled) is built into this conception. "Status incongruence," on the other hand, is a subjective reaction resulting from expectations by others and/or oneself that one's status-ranks ought to be equivalent and that status inconsistency ipso facto results in the disruption of predictable inter-personal behavior. E. Sampson's terms, "status incongruence" and "expectation incon- gruence" match this distinction, but this writer pre- l-fers to highlight the distinction by the usage first ,mentioned. See E. Sampson, "Status Congruence and ‘Cognitive Consistency," Sociometry_(June, 1963), pp. 146-162. The usage adopted here in this study is that recommended by L. Broom, "Social Differentiation and Stratification," in R. Merton (Ed.), Sociology Today_ (New York: Basic Books, 1957), p. 430. For an en- tirely different usage of "status inconsistency," see Footnote 6. Ibid., p. 413. Of course, no discussion of this concept should neglect its intellectual precursors. Max Weber's recognition and emphasis upon a multi-dimensional conception-of economic class, social honor, and power hierarchies- of stratification implicitly recognizes the possibil- ity of an individual holding imbalanced ranks in uni— bonded aggregates. M. Weber, "Class, Status, and Party," in R. Bendix and S. Lipset (eds.), Class, Status, and Power (Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1954), pp. 63-75. E. Benoit-Smullyan is often credited as the first l4 .rl _ .5 \v‘ I Z. .. I .r . z... a V r. wk ..4 a a L .14 ..C L bk .HA I, .r: Va .\~ AK , ‘r AK .~\ “PM . .t C. .I C - .1 C F. l T. H... O, J E b .C .c it .3 .l . m... . S V] r: E P. V1 P. C l O f k“ n «O A: T. h“ n O f ..G l e o F.» U o Tu o m...“ rim Au «TC 0 .3 D44 . o by no. o CO “I Wu t mm r« by e o e O o C l C o t .1 w H .5 ml. A e c r a ...U R 6: ..J .IU ,(\ :U In If A 4; mI‘v “pal .1" S p AU .1 p R .l A x: “‘9 1 Ju- kL Hou‘ K NHL «.40 I} all ”My .JJ AV 1&0 «(0 «(at A}. .n‘l‘ l 51‘ / Ht. ul.‘ \ 4r 15 contemporary to discuss the behavioral implications of the possession of disparately conceived ranks in the economic, social, and political "ladders," posit- ing "conversion" processes as generating dynamics to- gward the equilibration of ranks. See Benoit-Smullyan, ,fiStatus, Status Types, and Status Inter-relations," mAmerican Sociological Review, 9 (1944), pp. 151—161. This argument is critically evaluated in this thesis. Another conception of "status inconsistency" not adopt- ed here views inconsistency of status as an attribute of inter-personal encounters wherein two or more actors' ranks in two or more hierarchies may clash situation- ally. See G. Homans, as quoted in A. Malewski, "The Degree of Status Incongruence and its Effects," in R. Bendix and S. Lipset (Eds.), Class Statusiuand Power (New York: Free Press, 1966 edition), pp. 303- 309. J. Gibbs and W. Martin, Status Integration and Suicide (Eugene, Ore.: University of Oregon Press, 1964). E. Jackson, "Status Consistency and Symptoms of Stress," American Sociological Review, 27 (1962), pp. 469-480. \Also Jackson and Burke, "Status and Symptoms of Stress: Xx Additive and Interactive Effects," Pacific Sociolog: 12. fl... f‘\ -' 14 o. "iwical Review, 30 (1965), pp. 556-5640 G. Lenski, "Status Crystallization and Social Partici- pation," American Sociolggical Review, 21 (August, w. Landecker, "Class Crystallization and Class Con- sciousness," American Sociological Review, 25 (1960), pp. 219-230. G. Rush, "Status Inconsistency and Right—Wing Extrem- ism," American Sociological Review, 32 (February, 1967), pp. 86-92. Rush acknowledges this himself, ibid. This possibil- ity is noted as well by M. Gordon, Social Class in American Sociology (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 19587: p. 192. Also see S. Lipset and R. Bendix, Social Mobility in Industrial Society (Berke- 1ey, Calif.: U. of California Press, 19637, pp. 64-71. w. Kenkel, "The Relationship Between Status Inconsis- tency and Politico-Economic Attitudes," American Socio- logical Review, 21 (June, 1956), pp. 365-368. K. Kelly and W. Chambliss, "Status Consistency and Political Attitudes," American Sociological Review, 31 (June, 1966), pp. 375-382. “\ F". '_1 0‘» U‘ (D (A ‘w :T' d1 . /15. 16. .17. 18. 19. 20. "’ (21. 22. T“\j 23 o 16 G. Lenski, "Comment on Kenkel's Communication," Amer- ican Sociological Review, 21 (June, 1956), p. 368. Ibid. These four dimensions of Liberal-Conservative attitude were factors of Civil Rights, Civil Liberties, Welfare and Internationalism. Lenski Egg commented upon this in general in "Crystal- lization," p. 411, and in "Comment," p. 368. He has specifically noted this in "Status Inconsistency and the Vote: A Four Nations Test," American Sociological Review, 32 (April, 1967), p. 300. Those studies that have failed to corroborate Lenski's early findings employ a measure of status inconsistency that fails to include an ascriptive criterion such as Ethnic or Religious identification repute. Lenski, "Crystallization," p. 411. A permutation of 30 or more points among any pair of status-ranks ren— dered it as a high—low pair. But, note that this was done for respondents already calculated as status in- consistent. Possible cases of 30 point gaps between ranks among the respondents labeled as status consis- tent were not included. However, it is suspected that such a gap between ethnic group rank and relatively uniform ranks of education, occupation and income (thus, not "mathematically" status inconsistent) would yield the same degree of politico-economic Liberalism as found amongst the status inconsistent with low eth- nic group rank. This seems to be a reasonable assump- tion. If 3 of the 4 rank positions are the same, an inconsistency score as low as 53 (the break-point in Lenski's sample) is impossible unless there is a dif- ference of 47 percentile points on a fourth scale. Ibid. Ibid. Jackson (op. cit.) found significant differ- ences in symptoms of stress utilizing the same major distinction--ascriptive and achievement rank juxta— position. R. E. Mitchell, "Methodological Notes on a Theory of Status Crystallization," Public Opinion Quarterly (April, 1964), pp. 315-325. Ibid. ’ pp. 380-382. If the unequivocally consistently low ranked individual registers greater Liberalism in politico-economic mat- ters than does the low achievement ranked individual of high ethnic group repute, this is a class-controlled study that would jeopardize Lenski's thesis. But {\J h) .3) 0 (I1 }_l u-‘A rt: J35 - Or? W I) . (D PJ- fr ‘r‘f‘ '5 i It“. ' #1. r.“ C). (I. 2. ’_ ‘4. r) :Y (I.- ' 1 x (1 Fl 'U -’-\:I)F:3f this shift upon politico-economic opinion will be addi- tzionally assayed here. An instructor who has taught at 51 lower public school level (at least 2 years) will be <:lassified as upward mobile; residually, those who have 110t taught at another (lower) level will be (in this con- text) considered as non-mobile.32 Mobility (individual) ‘is expected to correlate with politico-economic conserva— tism and will be compared with the inter-generational modes of mobility. A battery of six items to tap direction of politico- economic opinion was incorporated as the final section of the Questionnaire. This set of items was chosen as the instrument to sample the instructors' evaluations regard- ing Federal involvement in various Economic matters affect- ing the well-being of all citizens. The content validity of these items should become apparent. In construction, two are "Likert-like"; five response alternatives ranging from "Strongly Agree" to "Strongly Disagree" to exhaust the spectrum of reaction (direction) to each issue. The other four items have substantive fixed-choice responses of equal appearing intervals. The issues are tied to an orientation which has traditionally been dimensioned "lib- eral-conservative."33 The items were chosen (a) on the basis of their past success in discriminating individuals on this dimension or (b) were constructed in Issue Areas where it was felt some improvement might be in order. For any item, the "liberal" extreme could be generalized as 63 registering support for federal (nationwide) programs de- signed to regulate (and enforce) "controls" upon "economic mechanism and institutions" in order to maximize opportuni- ties and "life-chances" for all citizens regardless of their ascribed statuses, i.e., to downplay the significance and deleterious consequences for Economic achievement that as— cribed status may have entailed. Careful wording of these questions was especially necessary because of the verbal sophistication and relative depth of information of this sample (or any sample at this educational level). Insofar as possible, it is desirable that these respondents not know or suspect the underlying factor built into the questions. Realistically, it is sus- pected that many did define this as a test for "conserva- tism-liberalism" (if the remarks are any indication). The section of questions was headed: Economic Orientations Social Researchers are interested in comparing the orientations of different people regarding public issues of the day. One important area in which we often find widespread difference of opinions both between and within occupations is that of the "place" or responsibility of Federal involvement in large-scale Economic problems fac- ing the United States and its people. The following ques- tions are geared to sample your opinions on facets of this relationship. Because many of the items may seem to force you into an over—simplified or even misleading reply, space is provided for your optional remarks in order to give you an opportunity to qualify your opinion. However, we do request that you gp_answer each question with one check mark only. If you wish to make more lengthy remarks, place them on separate sheets and attach them to the ques- tionnaire. Keep in mind that your opinions registered here are confidential. 64 The six items followed, with additional space for any open-ended comments: 1. 34 35 36 The limits of Federal responsibility in regard to the well-being (a minimum acceptable standard of living) of individuals and families in a society with our ideals should be: A. To insure that opportunities be kept open (and not illegally blocked) for all individuals to "get ahead" on their own, through government- ally regulated assurances of "Free Competition" within our national boundaries (e.g., maintain tariffs, prevent Monopolization, etc.). B. Don't know or undecided as to proper limits of Federal involvement. C. Guarantee every person the availability of a steady job paying a "living wage," thus provid— ing a degree of economic security by whatever legislatively approved measures necessary. With which of the following statements do you come the closest to agreeing? A. By and large, labor unions have been beneficial in our country and are continuing to do a good job. B. While there have been some excesses, on the whole labor unions have done more good than harm in this country. C. No opinion or undecided. D. Although labor unions were and still may be needed in this country, the current practices of large unions are doing our country more harm than good overall. E. This country would be better off without labor unions at all. "Welfare State" policies of the Federal Government tend to seriously curtail individual initiative. Strongly Agree Undecided or Disagree Strongly Agree Believe Con- Disagree sequences Vary 37 38 39 65 In regard to Social Security (Old-Age and Survivors Insurance programs and Medicare) Programs, I believe that the benefits ought to be (assuming that indi- vidual and employer continue to share the same propor- tional costs as now): A. Cut back. B. Kept about the same as now except the basis changed to voluntary individual contribution and benefit. C. Kept about the same (with only cost of living adjustments). D. Kept about the same, but with an extension of the programs to all categories of employed worker not now covered. E. Expanded in both coverage and benefits. The rights of private ownership and operation of bus- iness property against public encroachment must be respected and enforced within the law at practically all costs in order for meaningful personal freedoms to be maintained. Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree Many proposals aimed at "equalizing" financial oppor— tunities for all citizens have been raised in recent years. Which of the following proposals would you "endorse"? A. Passage of a guaranteed annual wage program to eventually replace current Public Assistance Programs (for unemployed and "unemployable"). B. Extension of profit-sharing plans to all levels of employees in private corporations. C. Removal of certain tax credits (which credits tend to harbor tax evasions) for private cor— porations. D. Continuation of (current) progressive income tax laws. E. None of the above. ' / .\ . \ . 66 Two other items used in pre-tests were excluded from the computation since their Guttman profile indicated that they were subject to inordinate error. For purposes of coding, the responses to five-choice items were collapsed to a scale of l to 3 (Conservative = 1; Moderate = 2; Liberal = 3). It is felt that no real accuracy in gauging the intensity of an opinion is gained in maintaining original gradations of support strength es- pecially when it has been shown that these "alleged” dif- ferences may reflect nothing more than linguistic habits in the Likert—type items. The total raw score for individ— uals then could range from 6 to 18 and for purposes of cate- gorical placement be coded as follows: 6-11 Conservative 12 Moderate 13-18 Liberal Obviously, these boundaries are somewhat arbitrary and, in particular, understress the prevalence of moderates in the sample. But the correlation of conservative or liberal tendencies with regard to politico—economic orientation is the focus here, not the exact grading of the phenomenon. For some statistical purposes, the raw score is employed; for some others, this discrete judgment is used. Scalogram analysis (see Appendix C) yields a C0- efficient of Reproducibility of .85 and a Minimal Marginal 67 Reproducibility of .65 for this six-item battery (with three response possibilities per item). Considering that the battery was not intentionally constructed to form a scale sui generis, such a level of scalabilityfsuitable for fur— ther statistical treatment of the scores.40 Only two of 85 individuals scored the maximum possible of three errors in response pattern when the items are listed in order of inducing liberal responses. These two instructors were excluded from all further analyses: for the Runs tests 'in which matched-pairs were employed, they were replaced by two "stand-by" instructors of the same total score. 68 The Logic of Proof and Statistical Measures The basic problem in assuring that the four major hypotheses of this work have been properly checked for fit with the data collected for that purpose is to specify the most powerful statistical measures consistent with the study's assumptions and limits of inference. The scores which will be compared are ordinal and not interval in nature: this holds true for the discrete attribution of Consistency/Inconsistency and summated Social Mobility/ Non-Mobility as well as for the percentile shifts and po— litico—economic opinion scores. Despite the equal appear- ing "intervals" in percentile assessment and in raw Politico— Economic score (in the items responses constituting the components), these are ordinal and not interval scalar scores. Non—Parametric statistics were employed.41 Additionally, the sample is non-parametric in that no "universe" of male, 25—45 year old junior college in— structors is conceived of which this is a representative sample. The selection procedures precluded such a concep- tion. At issue here is the investigation of phenomena who- ever it refers to: zip., status inconsistency and social \\ mobility (as each is conceived and operationalized). Com- parison of their relative frequencies is unnecessary and not at issue, since no descriptive inferences are at issue save that the achievement levels of the sample do coincide with the medians (for income especially) used as benchmarks of achievement. Probability sampling is employed merely to 69 randomly and representatively tap politico-economic liberal- ism as it is distributed among the status inconsistent and the socially mobile. With this in mind, the following statistical tech- niques were employed: Hypothesis I. Nominal-Ordinal Measures of Mobility: A. Kolgoroff—Smirnov Two Sample (Independent groups) Runs Test: B. Mann-Whitney U Test Hypothesis II. Wilcoxin Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks Test (Dependent Groups) Hypothesis III-IV. Two-Way Analysis of Variance (four cells) between Status Consistency and Social Mobility Sets (the Wilson Test) Thus, the total raw score in Politico—Economic Orientation is compared in Hypotheses I and II but the proportion of each sub-set classified as Liberal (i.e., above the median score of 12) is the object of the Analysis of Variance in Hypotheses III and IV. These measures of difference will be refined by controlling for certain face data acquired via the questionnaire. Alternatively, the face data vari- ables may have potential predictive association with po- litico-economic orientation and this will be explored par- ticularly if the hypotheses are not upheld by the imputed independent variables. 70 Procedures of the Inqpiry_ In the fall of 1967, a letter of introduction was left with the 100 instructors in the sample. This letter informed the potential respondents of a study "having both practical and scientific" bearing for which their coopera- tive participation was urged. It was billed as a study concerned with "the career paths and plans" of Junior Col— lege teachers. They were told that they would be person- ally contacted shortly in order to enlist their participa- tion. Visits to the three colleges resulted in 94 contacts, 92 of whom agreed to complete and return the questionnaire left with them. Eighty-seven actually did return the form, although in a few instances this required follow-up com- munication.42 This is a response return—rate of 92%, an extraordinarily high rate, indicating that this combination of personal contact and mail questionnaire technique may be quite effective in maximizing cooperation in studies \'of this type. Two of the 87 protocols had to be discarded, as the nationality or mobility of the instructor was not determinable from their questionnaire. As indicated ear— lier, two others were excluded from any testing of hypoth- eses for their exceedingly erratic response pattern, not only on the opinion section, but elsewhere on the form as well. It was essential that the percentile position of the instructor's father in terms of education and income be known for the years closest to the son's high school 71 attendance. The absolute educational level was ascertained by direct query. An income estimate for fathers was ob- tained by asking if the son thought his father obtained more, about the same, or less than others in his same line of work in their part of the country during that period. If "a little more," "about the same" or "a little less," then the median income for that occupation in that census year closest to the son's high school years was checked FI and percentile rank determined. As for occupation, the L NORC (1947) hierarchy of occupational prestige was service- I able in about two out of three cases; in the others, either intuitive judgment (if the occupation was known to be sim- ilar to one of the 90 occupations in the NORC scale) or an estimate based upon Duncan's Socio-Economic Status scale for all occupations was made.43 If these alternative meth- ods do not give as precise indications of inter—generational change in percentile rank, at least no problems arose in determining whether or not a 10 point change had been reg— istered. Of the three separate mobility components, that for income is believed to be the least reliable and for education the most reliable and their chosen indicators the least and most valid, respectively. The determination of national background (of citi— zenship) for the respondents was done in a relatively straightforward manner. Again, it is noted that the Low Ethnic Group Prestige Category is a residual category and may shield more differences than the likenesses it clusters. 72 Mum, agmrson of fourth generation American citizenship umoseenmestors migrated from Great Britain but who is of Jewiy1"ethnic" origin will be termed Status Inconsistent. Onlycmmzcase of this type of anomalous placement occurred in Umzsample in each consistency profile: a Protestant from Italy (therefore, Inconsistent) and a Roman Catholic from Sweden (therefore, Consistent). Nationality and pre- dominant religion of that nation takes precedence over the individual's current religious affiliation as a determiner of his profile category. The coding of the various mobil- ity indices and the consistency profiles was accomplished. Now we are in a position to report the findings and their theoretical significance. I”“"“”3 FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER III lQVyR. Hodge, "The Status Consistency of Occupational Groups," American Sociolpgical Review, 27 (June, 1962), pp. 336-343. Hodge argues that not enough attention has been directed toward the effects of status incon- sistency within functioning groups and quasi-groups such as occupations. Occupations in fact serve as good comparative units wherein the differential effects of varying profiles of median income, occupational prestige, and education render consistency scores which vary directly with other occupational attributes. See Footnote 4 for comment on the relative frequency of such discrepancy in the Labor Force. Hodge's con- cept is closely related to that of "stratum attribute consistency" in regard to another quasi-group-—social “,classes. See L. Broom, op. cit. 2. R. Hodge, P. Siegel, and P. Rossi, "Occupational Pres- tige in the United States," in Bendix and Lipset (eds.), Clas_s_i Status, and Power (2nd Edition), pp. 322-335. These distributions of prestige data updating 1947 NORC figures show the following scores: College Professor: 90 Public School Teacher: 81 Lacking more precise indices, our best assignment of Prestige for Junior College Instructors would be inter— mediate, i.e., 85. The "Public School Instructor" cate- gory explicitly was meant to refer to (and serve as a reliability check for) the "High School Teacher" and pp: to the Junior College teacher. See A. J. Reiss, Occupations and Social Status (Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 19597, pp. 47-48. 3. Its occupational prestige assessment is well above the median assessment of "all" occupations. Census data comparisons for 1960 of the average educational attainments of junior college instructors (S or more years of college) yield a percentile rank score of 98; 1966 figures would drop this level of education to the 96th percentile. Median income level for Public Junior College instructors in Michigan (all ages)?!‘ a maximum academic year salary of $9130 301‘ all ;: School System Regionifor holders of the M.A. in 1966. In Michigan, this income level falls at the sixty-third percentile for white families and unrelated individ— uals. Educational income data from Teachers Salary- Schedule Study (Michigan Education Association, 1966). The 1966 distribution of Michigan income data is based 73 5. 74 upon estimates in Sales Management: The Marketing Magazine, "Household Buying Power" (Philadelphia: A Bill Publication, June 10, 1967), pp. D-l36 to D—l380 This discrepancy may not be so awesome (or accurate) if several facts are kept in mind. (1) All profes- sional groups with rare exception evince a higher educational rank than income rank and some even evince a higher gap than do public school teachers. (2) The annual salary figure quoted for instructors does not take into account summer positions which most (male) instructors take to raise their income and, in effect, their income rank in the Labor Force. (3) Finally, and most noteworthy, status inconsistency figures on these three achievement criteria were calculated dur— ing the 1960 Census on the basis of a 5% national sam- ple. Operationally defined (minimally) as a twenty- percentile gap between one achievement level and one (of the other two) other held by this national sample of family heads, the status inconsistent constitute the majority of this representative sample, ranging from 69% in the South to 75% in the North Central States. See Special Subjects Reports: Socio-Economic Status, U.S. Census Repprts, 1960 PC (2)-5C, pp. 148 ff. These intriguing findings reveal that this gap between educational level and income may not be unusual rela- tive to other occupations in the Labor Force. For other intriguing implications of these data, see 2&3le - See Hodge, op. cit., p. 342. Also, A. J. Reiss, pp, cit., p. 88. 6.*“Lenski, "Status Crystallization," p. 411. Also, Rush, op. cit. It is instructive to note that the lone in— ’consistency profile that Rush found did not evince a higher "right-wing" (read "conservativEWI'response than that of the mean of the high-crystallized (read "consistent") was the white—collar, high education, and low income inconsistency profile. This character- izes the Junior College instructor. Unfortunately, Rush did not report in his article the items employed to tap these beliefs. Regardless of occupation, the same internal ordering of politico-economic opinion by status characteriza- tion would be anticipated. The occupational milieu may narrow the gamut of and "determine" the distribu— tion of such responses at particular levels but this in no(Wise affects the comparisons at stake here un- less we assume that the associational ethos of an occupation "cancels out" any differentiating effects of mobility and consistency profile and homogenizes opinion. See Chapter V. "“1. 75 8. 'Nfis is more true of men than women. See Burton R. Clark, "Sociology of Education," in R. Faris (ed.), op. cit., p. 755. 9.\Jkflge, op. cit., is only one among many who finds this to be patently true. See also, Leonard Reissman, Class pp.American Society (Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1959 , pp. 386-389. Even more basic postulates for this as- \ sumption are afforded by K. Davis and W. Moore, "Some \\Principles of Stratification," American Sociologicgl “Review, 10 (1945), pp. 242-249. 0. D. Duncan has been responsible for empirically supporting this contention. Among 88 occupations listed in the original North—Hatt Scale, the correlation (Kendall's Tau) of median in- come with occupational prestige is .85. For median rank of education with occupational prestige, it is .83. Jointly, the correlation is .91. At the indi- vidual (rather than aggregate) level, however, the \\ connection is not as direct. See A. J. Reiss, pp, \jpi£., p. 84, and pp. 140-141. 10. The only significant sociological studies of the Junior College Instructor's plight in this regard have been made by N. Friedman, "Career Stages and Organizational Role-Decisions of Teachers in Two Public Junior Col- leges," Sociology of Education (Summer, 1967), pp. 231—245; "The Subject—Matterist Orientation Toward Field of Academic Specialization," The American So- ciologist, 2:1 (February, 1967), pp. 12-16. An organi- zational study of the Junior College that also surveys faculty attitudes at the junior college level has been made by L. Medsker, The Junior College: Progress and Prospect (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960). 11. H. Ziegler, The Political Life of American Teachers (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 196777 Ch. 2. He argues that downward mobility is more common than upward mobility among high school teachers and he fo— cuses upon this plight. Cf. Footnote 8. His charge is all the more curious since he is referring to inter- generational occupational mobility only. If anything, we would submit that upward mobility is more frequent when inter-generational changes rather than individual mobility is focused upon. Also, Ziegler employs only occupational change (as gauged by the Revised Edwards Scale) to reflect social mobility. 12. Ibid., p. 36. 13. lhiited States Bureau of the Census, 1960. General Socfixxl and Economic Characteristics: Michigan. Table 79, pmu 276-277. Also Table 70, pp. 214-215. F—””-”3 14. 15. 16. 20. 0 2].. 76 It:flwuld be apparent that "family name" does not serve as Um indicator of status inconsistency but merely aside best means of selecting a sample which is most lflmfly to contain equivalent numbers of status consis- Uanzand status inconsistent. The more rigorous de- vnxm for placement are specified in the next section. "Status Crystallization: A Non-Vertical Di- lenski, 406 407 nmnsion," loc. cit., pp. IbkL A sample of 195 Detroit-area undergraduate stu- ckmts (University of Michigan) rated all of the ethnic groups found in the Detroit area on the basis of "what they thought to be the general community evaluation, as distinguished from their own personal evaluation." no student was permitted to rank his own eth- Two major objections here are: (1) Unlike education and income, amounts of ethnic prestige are not readily scaled by any interval measure. (2) The numbers of those at the higher reaches diminisgin of eflécdtfgs and education insure their high (percen— tile) status. Neither an interval scale nor the as— sumption of diminishing frequency among the highest (ordinal) prestige ethnic group is warranted. Even so, nic group. Supra, Chapter I, Footnote 18. The ethnic rank orders are well summarized in T. Lass— well, Class and Stratum (Boston: Houghton—Mifflin, 1965), pp. 341-348. The allusion to conceptual equiv- alence is found on page 343. This is a corollary of the "numbers game" in assigning percentile scores. Social Distance and Prestige level could then easily be ordered by size of ethnic group. People tend to prefer interaction with others of "their own kind" for a variety of reasons. If a Social Dis- tance scale were applied in South Africa to a repre- sentative sample of the population, the Bantu would «evince the least Social Distance if persons were per- Imitted.to rank their own ethnic group. If we convert iflmis rank—order to a rank—order of prestige (or power or Enrivilege) the asininity of the transposition be- cxxmes obvious. Also, note that the number of ethnic grrnips to be scaled in any system must be at least threxe in the ideal ranking situation. ITma;psycho-dynamics of this possibility cannot be systematized here but is a plausible turn of events. 15. VWarner and L. Srole, The Social Systems of American Ethnic Groups (New Haven: .rennaiJus the most comprehensive source. A quite Yale University Press, 1945), ’L ram—n...- \122. 23. \124. 25. 26. 77 satisfactory condensation may be found in Warner's Yankee Cipy volume (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963), Chapters 13 and 14. Further references here are from the latter source. Lenski, "Status Crystallization: A Non—Vertical Di- mension," pp. 406-407. Here Lenski states en passant that those ethnic groups from "North and Western Euro- pean" nations (which are primarily Protestant) fall highest in prestige-rank. Those from "South and Eastern European extraction" generally fell lower. Lasswell, op. cit., p. 346, shows that Social Distance hierarchies are closely correlated as well. Of course, those of low achievement indices would be "status consistent" or "inconsistent" in precisely the opposite ascribed status categories. The ethnic breakdown of the status consistent is not presented here. It should be remarked that British lineages dominate that sub-sample. Also, at this point no breakdown by "Foreign Stock" and "Native" stock is presented for the Status Inconsistent except to point out that their proportion of Foreign Stock (first or second generation) is appreciably higher than among the Status Consistent. For this reason, the matching of consistency profile pairs for runs- tests by generation was precluded. C.WeStoff etaflfl ”The Concept of Social Mobility: An Empirical Inquiry " American Sociological Review, 25:3 (1960), pp. 3W¥3 5. They carefully delineate many usually neglected approaches to the investigation of mobility which are of great utility. For both income and education distributions, two "in- dependent" sources of U.S. Census data were employed in the computation of percentile distributions. This was done to heighten reliability. Egg Income distri— butions of annual income for white male family heads for the North Central States region and for Michigan were used (inasmuch as these areas were home base for 86% and 61% respectively of the sample). Income sources for 1940, 1950, and 1960 were: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1962, Tables 441-452, pp. 329-336; also, U.S. Census of the Population: 1960, Michigan, General Social and Economic Characteristics, Table 65, pp. 207-212. For education, the ranks were calculated for white males over 25 years of age in the same regions as for income (both urban and rural). Data for 1940 were from U.S. Census of the Pppulation: 1940, Divisions and States, Table 35. Data for 1950 are from U.S. h; 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 78 Inueau of the Census: 1950, Vol. II, Characteristics oftme Population, Part I, U.S. Summagy, Chapter C. Dahafor 1960 were collected from U.S. Bureau of the Chnsus: 1960, Vol. I, Chapter C, and the Final Report, m:(2)-5B. Corresponding Michigan data were corrob- cuated in the cited Michigan source, Table 47, pp. 24-192. There still is debate as to which period of father's and son's occupational (or income-making) lives should serve as the bench—marks of comparison. It has been <flxfided here that the late high—school years are cru- cial for further educational and occupational decision- making and that the father's occupation at this point is the most crucial inter—generational influence upon the son's (sons') future achievements. See Lipset and Bendix, "Social Mobility in an Industrial Society," and also S. Sabuda, "A Methodological Inquiry into Social Mobility," American Sociological Review, 29:1 (1964), pp. 16-23, for an airing of various alterna- tives, their advantages and disadvantages. One modification was made in practice. If the son registered 15 percentile point shifts upward on any two of the three, he need only have registered a rise in percentile posi ion on the third (usually income percentile). The studies of Lipset and Bendix cited are the most noted example of this type of mobility focus. Insofar as there is great overlap in income (and to a lesser extent, educational) medians between Non-manual (White- Collar) and Manual (Blue-Collar) occupations and even in the Occupational Prestige Hierarchy, it is not a fair assumption that Non-manual and Manual are clear- cut classes of differing prestige, power, and privilege even though there still is much evidence that "switch- over" is relatively uncommon (at individual level of mobility). Wilensky, op. cit. 1;..Reynolds, The Structure of Labor Markets (New Haven: ‘Yale University Press, 1951f. CNiis latter is a residual category in that it would jJKJIUde any who might normally be considered (indi- vdxhially) downward mobile, 123,, any who may have taught at: the University level. Also, it should be noted that this mobility focus excludes other jobs (of lower or liigtmn: prestige level) held prior to entering teaching. Interestingly enough, very few instructors (even those agexi 35-45) reported holding full-time positions (of eat lxyast a year's duration) prior to becoming teachers. 33. 79 (mvnxmly, the terms "conservative" and "liberal" as ideabtype constructs include many connotations beyond thomedenoted as the focus here. Each of these clus- terscfi nuances could be the object of inquiry given otmflrpurposes. It is important therefore that a few ofijmse be specified here in order to waylay any con- fuanIin our usage. One major attitudinal reference of fimse bi-polar concepts is "change—minded" (or, opmvmdnded) and "maintenance-minded" (or close—minded) Imuking the "liberal" and "conservative" viewpoint resgxfijvely. Note that regardless of content under mmuflderation, the "liberal" is open to considering cflmnge‘whereas the "conservative" is antipathetic to cunmddering changes from existing (established) pat- terns. This basically psychological reference is not In fact, in the choice and construction at issue here. of items, attempts were made to dilute the empirical contamination of this possible intrusion by including some items in which the substantively "liberal" response would involve change from existing (consensually val- idated) policies and some items that would not involve change from existing governmental policies. Likewise for the "conservative" responses. A second nuance faces another substantive (and his- torically bound) meaning of the terms. This conception is not the focus of this inquiry but we cannot specify whether its actual 'extrusion has been achieved here. Those typed as "liberal" (politico-economically) thirty years ago would more certainly fit the orientation at issue here than any contemporary sample and particu— larly one currently in the 25-45 year range of in- structors. Sympathies to Federal intervention and to organized strength of Labor Unions may have been re- versed (or at least attenuated) in recent years among individuals now characterized as "New Left" as opposed "Old Left," i.e., "Big Government" may now be be- to coming an.object of alienation or disdain as much as "Big Business" was a generation ago. The over-exten— sirni and.arbitrariness of power imputed to "Big Bus— has in part been transferred to "Big Government" (in time "New Left" ideology. In other words, unless .precznrtions are taken, those scaled as "conservative" hertalnay include both the "old-right" plus the "new lefflfl' joined by opposition to Governmental'interven— ticni in private affairs. iness" .A tfliird nuance of "conservative-liberal" alluded to earlier is that on orientation vis a vis Civil Rights substantive issues. This is not being gauged directly here although it is acknowledged that some of the items sflcirfl: dangerously close to this. The theoretical base of? Stquort for politico-economic liberalism could serve eas \ueJIL for non-economic conception. See Rush, op. cit., or Supra, page 16, footnote 16, for other sub-scales. ‘L 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 80 R. Centers, The Psychology of Social Classes (Prince- ton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1949). Re- ported in Laumann, op. cit., pp. 180-184. This item taps Issue Area II, Supra, p. 8 (A. Conservative; C. Liberal). B. Berelson et al., Votipg: A Study of Opinion For- mation in a Presidential Campaign IChicago: Univer- sity of Chicago Press, 1954). Laumann, loc. cit. This item taps Issue Area IV, Supra, p. 8 (A-B. Lib— eral; D-E. Conservative). R. Goldson et al., "Political Apathy, Economic Con- servatism," in B. Stoodley (ed.), Society and Self (New York: Free Press, 1962), p. 267. This item taps Issue Area II, Supra, p. 8 (Agree. Conservative; Dis- agree. Liberal). F7=tmeg . This item was especially constructed for this inquiry. Tapping Issue Area I, Supra, p. 8, preliminary content validity checks were made in a pilot check (A-B. Con- servative; D—E. Liberal). This item, slightly reworded, was drawn from A. W. Jones, Life,_LibertyJ and Property (Philadelphia: Lippincott & Co., 1941). It purportedly taps Issue Area III, Supra, p. 8 (Agree. Conservative; Disagree. Liberal). This item, tapping Issue Areas I and IV, Supra, p. 8, was especially constructed for this inquiry (A-D. Lib- eral; E. Conservative). P. Hatt, "Occupations and Social Stratification," in Reiss, op. cit., p. 251, footnote 29. Also, 0. McNemar, "Opinion—Attitude Methodology," Psychological Bulletin, 43 (July), pp. 289-374. The most valuable statistical source in the selection of techniques has been S. Siegel, Nonparametric Sta- tistics for the Behavioral Sciences TNew York: McGraw- Hill, 1956). Throughout the field phase, the obligation of mutual feedback was stressed. Those who participated were told that they would each receive a resume of the study's findings. This resume summarized the relative frequencies of various face variables and gave partial coverage to the hypotheses and their outcome. Also, it should be noted that follow-up letters were neces- sary for about one instructor in four after three weeks had passed since they had received the questionnaire. All but five who accepted a questionnaire returned it. 81 43. O. D. Duncan, "A Socio—Economic Index for all Occu- pations," in A. J. Reiss, op. cit., Chapters 6 and 7, CHAPTER IV THE RESULTS AND THEIR ANALYSIS Introduction Before reporting the findings relevant to tests of the major hypotheses of this study, attention must be drawn to certain characteristics of the sample. First, is its aggregate profile, if not representative in any universal sense, at least not suspected to be atypical of younger (under age 46) white male junior college instruc— tors? No definitive answer can be given since no detailed picture of junior college instructors' median years of teaching, income, degree level, teaching field, etc., are available (at the state or nation—wide level) within these limitations of age and sex. However, it is believed that in these aforementioned respects the pooled sample approxi- mates male instructors under age forty-six. The only known qualification to this belief is that the sample inten- tionally, over-represents those of Southern and Eastern European (and Jewish) extraction in each of the respective colleges. Indeed, of 226 male full-time instructors (aged 25 to 45) in the three schools (who incidentally comprise approximately one—half of the total faculties) only 45 could be identified via inspection of family name as "status inconsistent." The stratified random sampling technique 82 83 insured their inclusion in the sample. More importantly, it is believed that the subsamples did reflect the composition of each school in the respects delineated, within the limitations of age, sex, and ethnic representation mentioned. What ppp be confirmed is the only slight extent of salient difference between the sub-samples that makes pooling them a justifiable procedure.l Were the sub-samples radically different in these respects gpg in patterns of relationship between the critical variables of the inquiry, pooling this data might be indefensible since this would becloud patterns (negating or "canceling" them, as it were) unique to each faculty sub-sample. This possibility must be inspected even though this is pp: a comparative analysis of institutional frameworks or of teachers by teaching milieu. The following tables render breakdowns by age, number of years taught, American Federation of Teachers membership, teaching field, and politico-economic Liberal- ism for the 83 instructors at Colleges "D," "F," and "L.” Table 4.1. Age distribution by college sub-sample Age College D F L Total 26—35 12 16 4 32 36-45 26 17 8 51 Total 38 33 12 84 Table 4.2. Years taught by college sub—sample Years Taught College D F L Total 0-4 8 9 5 22 5-8 3 8 2 13 9+ 27 16 5 48 Total 38 33 12 Table 4.3. AFT membership by college sub-sample AFT Membership College D F L Total Yes 27 12 - 39 No 11 21 — 32 Total 38 33 - Table 4.4. Teaching field by college sub—sample Teaching Field College D F L Total Vocational Technologies 13 8 2 23 Natural Sciences 9 8 l 18 Humanities 10 7 5 22 Social Sciences; Counseling 4 9 3 16 Other 2 l 1 4 Total 38 33 12 _.. 85 Table 4.5. Politico-economic orientation by college sub- sample Politico-Economic College Orientation D F L Total Liberal 21 10 6 37 Moderate 4 6 0 10 Conservative 13 17 6 36 Total 38 33 12 Table 4.6. Status consistency profile by college sub-sample College D F L Total Status Consistent 21 17 6 44 Status Inconsistent 17 16 6 39 Total 38 33 12 Independent tests of significance with Liberalism were conducted for each of the variables delineated in Tables 4.1 through 4.4 (as well as for others: see Appen- dix B). In other analyses beyond tests of the four major hypotheses, age was employed as a critical intervening variable between Mobility and Consistency Profiles respec- tively and politico-economic orientation. Further, an in- dex of individual reactions to hypothetical negative role evaluation was checked for affiliation with type of politico- economic response. Figure 4.1 graphically shows the dis- tribution of these orientations in the sample. 86 15 14 13 HfDUBCZ 12 11 PhD 10 (DHOrt‘OCHd’le—i 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18" Politico-Economic Score Figure 4.1. Distribution of Politico-Economic Scores 87 Hypothesis 1. Social Mobility and Politico-Economic Liberalism The following conceptions of social mobility were operationalized and gauged for their relation to (raw) politico-economic score: 1. Career Mobility (Individual) 2. Manual (Occupational) Mobility (Inter—genera— tional) 3. Summated Mobility (Inter—generational) a. Mobility Educatiom b. Mobility(Income) c. Mobility(Occupational Prestige) For each index, Liberalism was hypothesized as more prev- alent among the Non—Mobile (Stable) than those discretely classified as Upward Mobile. Kolgoroff—Smirnoff Two-Sample Tests and Mann—Whitney Tests alike were employed to test these Independent groupings' significance of difference (p = .05, one-sided) in Politico—Economic Liberalism. The actual findings are shown in Tables 4.7 through 4.12. Table 4.7. Career mobility and politico-economic liberalism Career Mobility: nl = Stable (higher); n2 = Iobile Kolgoroff-Smirnov D = .2453, p = .08 (Approx.) Mann-Whitney U = 749.50; nl = 39, n2 = 44, p = .16 (Approx.) 88 Table 4.8. Manual mobility and politico-economic liberalism Manual (Occupational) Mobility: nl = Stable (higher); n2 = Mobile Kolgoroff—Smirnov D = .1779, p = .27 (Approx.) Mann-Whitney U = 748; n = 43, n = 40, l 2 p = .15 (Approx.) The raw data for both of these Mobility groupings lie in the predicted direction but since the differences are statistically non-significant, chance factors alone could well be responsible. The prediction of greater Lib- eralism is not borne out among the other conceptual group- ings either and their distribution is (non-significantly) in the opposite direction. Table 4.9. Mobility (education) and politico-economic liberalism Mobility (Education): nl = Mobile (higher); n2 = Stable Kolgoroff-Smirnov D = .2106, p = .24 (Approx.) Mann-Whitney U = 575.50; h1 = 60, n2 2 22, p = .19 (Approx.) 89 Table 4.10. Mobility (income) and politico—economic liberalism Mobility (Income): nl = Mobile (higher); n2 = Stable Kolgoroff—Smirnov D = .2267, p = .13 (Approx.) Mann-Whitney U = 646.50; r11 = 48, n2 2 34, p = .05 (Approx.) Table 4.11. Mobility (occupational prestige) and politico- economic liberalism Mobility (Occppational Prestige): nl = Mobile (:>15 points); n2 = Mobile (10-15 points); n3 = Stable (<:10 points) Kolgoroff—Smirnov (K Sample Test) Bhapkar V = 2.5409, nl = 36, r12 = 25, n3 = 22, p = .28 (Approx.) Table 4.12. Summated mobility and politico-economic liberalism Summated Mobility_(Components: Education, Income, Occu- pational Prestige): nl = Mobile (higher); n2 = Stable Kolgoroff—Smirnov D = .1973, p = .21 (Approx.) Mann-Whitney U = 670.50; n = 51, n 1 32, 2 = p = .09 (Approx.) 90 If it be accepted that at least one of these oper- ationalizations meaningfully taps vertical social mobility, then it appears that upward mobility is not affiliated with conservatism inasmuch as each comparison of the Stable and the Upward Mobile yields non—significant differences in politico—economic Liberalism. This lack of support for the Hypothesis (or failure to reject the null hypothesis)—- could it be due to age differences of the mobile and stable? Apparently not. The younger are just as likely upward mo— bile as the older if individual (career) change or summated increments in educational, occupational prestige, and in— come are the focus. However, significant differences do arise between younger and older instructors' rates of mo- bility when manual mobility is the focus: the younger tend to be more likely of white collar background (i.e., stable) than the elder sector (p ‘<.05).2 91 Hypothesis 11. Status Inconsistency and Politico-Economic Liberalism Significantly higher politico-economic Liberalism is evinced by instructors profiled as Status Inconsistent than by those profiled as Status Consistent. Comparisons I\