SOCIAL MOBILITY

Group -6
Anushka, Anisha Das, P Monika, Riya Kumari, Riya Ranjan, Komal Kumari, Shruti Kumari,
Sikha Kumari, Pragati Jha, Zunaira Fatima, Anjali kashyap, Rishika Gupta
Introduction-
The essay “Social mobility” is an excerpt from “Inequality: A
contemporary approach to race, class and gender” by Keister and
Southgate published in 2012. This book follows a hybrid approach
where it is structured as basic concepts and application, which are
further divided into various chapters. While the former addresses
knowledge accumulated by scholars of stratification, the latter
challenges students to apply this information to their social world. This
essay social mobility is a subpart of application where recent research on
the United States is used to round the discussions on patterns and factors
of social mobility.
This essay largely delves into the concepts of what social mobility is,
how is it measured, why some people are unable to change their
positions, what is the nature of different stratification systems and finally
explores the theoretical approaches to understand mobility.

Meaning and Measurement-

Pitirim Sorokin defines social mobility as “Any transition of an
individual or social object or value-anything that has been created or
modified by human activity -from one social position to another”.
Research on social mobility identifies the degree of social mobility in
terms of its dimensions.
Crucial Dimension in Mobility-
 DIRECTION- Direction is one dimension along which
mobility varies .

-Vertical mobility (Upward and downward mobility)

Upward mobility refers to an improvement in status
Eg, entrepreneur who become part of new rich
Downward mobility is decline in status
Eg, during economic slowdown (great depression) increase job losses
can lead to downward mobility for entire groups, or in certain
geographical regions

-Horizontal or lateral mobility- refer to movement that is neither

better nor worse but rather sideway or at the same level
Eg changing from one occupation to another of similar status
Geographic mobility can involve lateral mobility
Often ,a lateral change in status on one dimension (occupation) involve a
lateral change in status on the other dimension as well (eg. Income and
wealth)

 GENERATION- Dimension of mobility that’s measured in

terms of generation.
-Intergenerational: the mobility taken place between generations .
Measured by comparing one’s position to their parents/grandparents.
E.g.:- If a person acquires more or less wealth/ prestige that their
parents/grandparents..
-Intragenerational:Refers to the type of mobility within a single
generation. Also known as career or occupational mobility. E.g. A person
who started working as a cleaner in an office, and eventually owns that
building.

 STRUCTURAL MOBILITY-Mobility results from

changes in the structure of society is called as structural mobility.
For instance when demand to perform a certain job increases and
more people are needed to fill the positions this resulting mobility
is structural .it has been the case throughout most of the American
history that the economic growth allowed the majority of people to
do better than their parents
Circulation or exchange mobility ( either upward or downward)- The
sort of mobility results from the innate skills ambitions of individual
rather than change in the occupational structure it is not always easy to
determine how much structural or exchange mobility there is research
evidence suggest that in recent years circulation mobility in US has
increase yet economic fluctuations and changing generation patterns
make it difficult to ascertain how much mobility there is.

 ABSOLUTE VS RELATIVE-
- Absolute -Absolute mobility refers to changes in position
that result because living standards are changing in absolute
term.We are better than our parents, our children will be
better off than us ,and their children will better off than
them .Structural changes such as industrialization or
advancements in technology can lead to absolute mobility
 Relatives- Relative mobility refers to the degree to which a
person moves up or down in the various hierarchies (e.g.,
wealth, income, occupation,and education) compared to other in
the same generation. Because relative mobility is measured in
comparison to other, it is a zero-sum phenomenon: if one person
moves up, another must move down. Moreover, although there
is support for increases in absolute mobility , research has
different conclusions about changes in relative mobility .

Mobility pattern through history-

Russian-born American sociologist and political activist Pitirim
Sorokin first introduced the concept of social mobility in his book
“Social and Cultural Mobility”. Social mobility has changed
significantly throughout history. In the 19th century, industrialization
and modernization led to increased intergenerational mobility and a shift
from ascription to achievement in marital mobility such as including
movies, books, and newspaper articles emphasize social mobility
through rags-to-riches tales.
Peesan(1974) reviewed the available historic data from large cities and
attempted to piece together a picture of how much people could
anticipate in their life and divided into three classes such as rich, middle
or poor.
Intergenerational Correlations
Intergenerational Correlations on a very wide scale is one of the two
methods of determining levels of mobility along with transition studies.
This term relates to the degree to which certain traits, behaviours, or
outcomes in individuals are influenced by their parents’ characteristics
or experiences. These correlations represent the amount of variations in
one generation’s well being that is associated with the same measure in
the previous generation . Researchers have delved into exploring
intergenerational persistence of a number of adult outcomes like
education, earning ,wages etc. Their estimates have suggested there is
persistence across generations in a number of status measures. In
essence, ,Intergenerational correlation shows how parents’ traits and
achievements impact their children over generations, shaping family
legacies and influencing both advantages and disadvantages.

transitional Studies-Transition means a change from

one state or form to another.
Transition matrices also can be used to study upward and
downward mobility. The mobility table, arrays individuals within
groups in a start year and shows the proportion of who moved to
another or stayed in the same group in a finish year.
The table is divided into quintiles or fifths of the wealth distribution.
Transition matrices provides more detail about who moves and
where,it also capture those changes which takes place between
categorical groups.
Drawback: It requires specialized data that are difficult to collect.
System of Stratification-
Stratification systems refer to the hierarchical organization of society
based on— various factors such as wealth, power, and prestige. These
systems play a crucial role in determining individuals’ social status and
opportunities for mobility within a society.
Stratification can indeed be divided into open and closed systems:
1) Open Stratification Systems: In an open system, social mobility
is facilitated and encouraged. Individuals can move up or down the
social hierarchy based on their merit, achievements, motivation,
and talent. Factors such as family background, race, ethnicity,
gender, and religion have less influence on one’s position in the
hierarchy in open systems. These types of stratification are
common in modern, industrialized nations, where individual merit
is valued, and social policies often aim to promote mobility.

Class system-. A class system is one of the most open stratification

systems found in modern societies. Unlike other systems,
individuals are not formally restricted from moving up or down the
social hierarchy, and there's no guarantee of retaining one's
position. Emerging during the Industrial Revolution in eighteenth-
century Europe, class systems were driven by the need for labour
in rapidly industrializing societies. These systems allow for
mobility through factors like education and economic success.
Laws and norms often encourage mobility within class systems.
2)Closed Stratification Systems: In contrast, a closed system
restricts social mobility, and formal laws and social norms aim to
prevent it. Social status is typically determined at birth, and
individuals have little opportunity to change their position in the
hierarchy throughout their lives. Family characteristics play a
significant role in determining status in closed systems, and
individual effort or merit has limited influence. Closed
stratification systems are more prevalent in traditional societies,
where inequality may be seen as normal or necessary.

Caste system- A caste system rigidly determines social positions

based on hereditary social groups, as seen in the Indian caste
system with its four primary groups: Brahmins, Kshatriyas,
Vaishyas, and Shudras, along with untouchables facing
discrimination. Beliefs in reincarnation perpetuate this system.
Similarly, systems like South African apartheid and Jim Crow laws
enforced racial stratification, restricting mobility and perpetuating
inequality.

Estate system- Estate systems, prevalent in feudal societies before

the emergence of class systems, featured a small nobility
controlling resources while a large peasantry worked for them in
exchange for protection. Mobility between classes was rare, and
marriage within one's social class was typical. Feudalism, common
in Europe during the Middle Ages and in some parts of Asia and
Latin America, was supported by powerful lords and the Catholic
Church, which viewed inequality as divinely ordained.

Slavery- Slavery represents the most extreme form of closed

stratification, where individuals are treated as property, forced into
 labor, and denied basic rights. Historical examples include slavery
in the United States and Brazil, where slaves endured harsh
conditions and limited freedoms. Modern forms of slavery, such as
human trafficking for forced labor or the sex industry, continue to
exist globally, perpetuating exploitation and oppression.

Theories of Mobility-

Individual Influences:
Individual approach focuses on characteristics and families of an
individual. It includes characteristics such as individual effort, talent,
determination, education, gender and race or ethnicity.

SOME FACTORS AFFECTING SOCIAL MOBILITY OF AN

INDIVIDUAL
Education: Social mobility is promoted through development,
propagation and spread of education. The people who receive more and
more education achieve higher and higher social status.

Family networks: A person's societal place such as gender, race,

ethnicity also affects mobility. Having luckily born into a family that
values education or has social networks can provide greater mobility
chances than being born into a family without those traits. For example,
a person born in a family of Brahmins may be poor, of bad character,
will enjoy the status of Brahmin due to his birth in a Brahmin family.
Occupational Prestige: Some occupations carry greater prestige. For
example, I.A.S. officers and Doctors are considered to be better than the
Engineers, Lawyers and Teachers.

Status attainment model (Duncan 1961): Proposes the degree to which

people do well in life, their attainment is influenced by their inherited
traits as well as their own achievements. Blau and Duncan concluded
that ascribed characteristics have a more mediating and enabling role
than a predictive role for future status. This model finally concludes that
achieved characteristics are more important predictors of future
attainment than an ascribed characteristics.

Wisconsin model ‐ social psychological model of educational and

occupational attainment: (Sewell 1992)
Researchers introduced:
 Family and background characteristics( parent's attainment, family

and religion)
 Contextual traits ( neighbourhood, geography)

 Individual traits( first job as predictor of subsequent jobs)

 Social psychological variables( inspirations and motivations)

 Peer influences

Structural influence -
Structural Influence Theory is based on assumption that individual
efforts operate within social structures and hence mobility results from
structural change rather than individual efforts. It finds fault with the
common American assumption that individual hard work is all that is
required to get ahead and suggests that even considerable hard work is
not enough to create mobility if the structural conditions are not
favorable.
SOME FACTORS AFFECTING SOCIAL MOBILITY OF AN
INDIVIDUAL :
1. Economic Condition : The periods of poor economic conditions like
Great Depression impede mobility while periods of great economy boom
like the Long Boom facilitate mobility.
2. Generational Crowding : People born into relatively crowded
generation find it more difficult to grab good opportunities like getting
accepted into a good college and hence impeding their mobility.
3. Characteristics of the Nation : An individual being citizen of a nation
where opportunities facilitating mobility are not offered to all the
citizens, impedes mobility for restricted ones like certain restrictions
imposed on women in various Islamic Countries.
4. Surrounding Social Conditions : Living in not so well to do social
environment often impedes mobility of an individual as it fails to offer
certain opportunities.
5. Technological innovations : An individual being born into an era of
technologies has higher and quicker chance of mobility.
6. Distribution of demographic traits in the population : Mobility of an
individual facilitates or impedes depending upon him/her being a part of
a certain demographic trait like Countries having high number of senior
citizens and children often facilitate mobility for young people.
Thereby, we conclude the theories of mobility with the Individual
Influences suggesting that any individual can get ahead with the right
amount of efforts while the Structural Influences suggesting that even
considerable individual efforts are not enough to create mobility if
structural conditions are not favorable.

Conclusion
In conclusion, we explored the patterns of social mobility and the factors
that affect a person’s chances of mobility. The essay delved deeper into
different aspects of mobility, including direction (upward or downward
movement), generational shifts (mobility across family lines), structural
influences (how social systems impact mobility), and both absolute
(objective change in social class) and relative (change in position
compared to others) mobility. Moreover, on analysing the mobility
patterns through the history, primarily focusing on America, the datas
suggested that mobility was limited prior to 1900. Following this, the
essay analysed the methods used to determine social mobility levels,
including intergenerational correlations (comparing social positions
across generations) and transition studies (tracking individual movement
within the social structure). We then examined these mobility pattern
through the sizeable literature put forward by various scholars in the
recent years. However, understanding why some people are mobile and
others are not requires a discussion of the role of the stratification
system. Keister and Southgate(2012) categorise these systems into open
stratification system, closed stratification system, class system, estate
system, caste system and slavery. In open systems, individuals have
more opportunities to move between social classes, while closed systems
restrict this movement. These stratification systems can take different
forms, such as class systems based on socioeconomic factors, estate
systems where social position is inherited, caste systems with rigid birth-
determined hierarchies, and slavery, the most extreme form that denies
basic rights. Keister and Southgate further explore the theories of
mobility, examining both individual aspects like effort and talent, and
structural elements like the education system and job market, which can
limit or promote mobility opportunities. Thus, social mobility is a crucial
element in the study of social stratification and this essay portrayed a
clear picture of mobility patterns among the Americans. Furthermore,
the attempt to trace the patterns of mobility in the history of United
States through intergenerational and transitional studies, showed how
recent research in the 19th and 20th century were used to substantiate
the theories on stratification. In a nutshell this work by Keister and
Southgate manifests a clear balance between accumulated knowledge
and their application in the social world.