B_08 Segmentation of Social Milieus and Their Mutual Evaluation
Projects
- Sections:
- Bremen
- Disciplines:
- Sociology
Abstract
Against the backdrop of the hypothesis that society is drifting apart, this work package investigates how social milieus perceive one another. It examines their knowledge about each other and their mutual understanding. A key focus lies on the extent to which the social networks of different milieus are separated from one another, as well as on where social circles continue to overlap.
The work package complements Research Area B through two perspectives. The first addresses the segmentation of social milieus and their mutual perceptions. The second adopts a network perspective to map cross-milieu contacts. We analyze the symbolic and social relations between milieus. Particular attention is paid to the question of how social cohesion is shaped by the density of social networks and, conversely, how segmentation between milieus may endanger social cohesion. Our focus lies on the mechanisms through which social groups draw boundaries vis-à-vis one another.
The work package continues the mixed-methods research conducted during the first RISC funding phase on the mutual perception and evaluation of social milieus. It now expands its scope to include previously underrepresented groups, particularly precarious and marginalized milieus.
Findings from the 618 interviews conducted in the first phase show that marginalized groups, in particular, experience rejection at above-average rates. We therefore plan to conduct an additional 200 interviews with marginalized individuals and people with migration histories.
This approach will generate a comprehensive picture of the German milieu landscape and allow us to illuminate dynamics and tensions between opposing milieus. The analysis of social networks will also yield insights into opportunity structures: Where do individuals from different milieus come into contact and discover commonalities that may have cohesion-enhancing effects? In addition, the structuring role of religion in social networks and migrant communities will be examined.
This work package (WP) is situated within Research Focus 3 and aims to expand the existing data from the project BRE_F_03 through an additional mixed-methods study with a particular focus on marginalized groups and migrants. Within the research area and its focus, the WP makes a distinctive contribution to the analysis of the segmentation of social milieus and their mutual perceptions. It also offers a dedicated network perspective that captures, among other things, patterns of cross-milieu contact. Social milieus are conceptualized within the WP as latent large-scale groups characterized by similar social positions and shared cultural values.
Analysis of the 618 mixed-methods interviews conducted in the first phase shows that marginalized groups (for example, the so-called precarious milieu) are disproportionately subject to rejection. To generate robust findings on perceptions of marginalized groups and people with migration histories, an additional 200 interviews with individuals from these groups are planned. The goal is to obtain a comprehensive picture of Germany’s milieu landscape and to illuminate the dynamics and tensions between opposing milieus. In this respect, the WP contributes directly to the second guiding question of the research area.
To examine tensions and lines of polarization, the WP draws, among other approaches, on the concept of the social production function. This concept posits that individuals acquire skills and values over the course of their lives—often conceptualized as forms of social and cultural capital. Unlike economic capital, these skills and values cannot be easily transformed; they are relatively inert. Individuals therefore have a strong interest in maintaining societal recognition of their capital in order to avoid devaluation and the associated loss of recognition. At the same time, these forms of capital are not contingent, which gives rise to competition between carrier groups. Societal conflicts between large-scale groups are thus often conflicts over the institutionalization of specific social production functions. A contemporary example of such a conflict is the debate over gender-inclusive language (see also B_02).
In this sense, the WP also engages with the themes of the first guiding question by examining milieus and their (symbolic) boundary-drawing practices. The analysis of social networks further provides insights into opportunity structures by identifying where individuals from different status groups come into contact and discover common ground that may generate cohesion-enhancing effects.
Finally, the WP addresses the third and fourth guiding questions by focusing on marginalized groups and people with migration histories who are affected by increasing social inequality and who are frequently discussed in media discourse yet rarely given a voice (for example, in debates around “citizen's allowance” or “migration”). The perspectives of these groups on processes of externalization and social change should therefore be included when analyzing practices of social cohesion.
