# data[].attributes.body
https://www.citationmachine.net/chicago

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Baker, Michael J. The Marketing Book. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2002. https://htbiblio.yolasite.com/resources/Marketing%20Book.pdf.

Schreiber, Trine. "Conceptualizing Students' Written Assignments in the Context of Information Literacy and Schatzki's Practice Theory." Journal of Documentation 70, no. 3 (2014): 346-363. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-01-2013-0002.

Donahue, Bill. "King of the Mountains." Backpacker, September/October 2019. http://backpacker.eoncontent.ebscohost.com/2226647#&pageSet=39

Last name, First name or Organization Name. "Title of Article or Page." Title of Website. Date published or last modified or accessed. URL.

Patel, Sujan. "15 Must-have Marketing Tools for 2015." Entrepreneur. January 12, 2015. http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/241570.

Last Name, First Name. "Title of the Blog." Name of Blog Site (blog). Title of Larger Blog, if part of a larger one, Month Day Year of post. URL.

Miller, Shannon. "Valentine Ideas Using Digital Tools, Hands, Creativity, and a Little Love for Padlet." The Library Voice, January 20, 2016. http://vanmeterlibraryvoice.blogspot.com/2016/01/valentine-ideas-using-digital-tools.html.

Last name, First name. "Title of Conference Paper." Format presented at Title of Conference, Location, Date. URL.

Myerson, Craig. "Historical Markings in New Castle, Delaware." Power-point presentation presented at The University of Delaware, Newark, DE, June 18, 2019.

Michael Clum v. Jackson National Life Insurance Co., 10-000126-CL (Ingham Cty. 2011).

Last name, First name. "Title of Dissertation." Type of Paper, School, Year. URL or Database(Identification Number).

Kirschenbaum, Michele. "Young Students' Online Searching Capabilities." Master's thesis, Drexel University, 2009.

Title of Facebook Page. "Text of Post." Facebook, Month Day, Year. URL.

Awakenings. "Maceo Plex gave us goosebumps during Awakenings Festival! We can't wait to hear what he has in store during Maceo Plex x Lone Romantic | Awakenings ADE Elementenstraat on October 19:awak.enin.gs/2KMxDCH." Facebook, September 12, 2019. https://www.facebook.com/pg/awakenings/posts/?ref=page_internal.

Last name, First name. "Title of Video." Producer. Published on Month Day, Year. Site video, Length. URL.

"Habitats Works in Texas After Hurricane Harvey." Habitat for Humanity. Published on September 11, 2019. YouTube video, 01:35. https://youtu.be/EPPALfWYGRo.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Citation Machine®: CHICAGO Format & CHICAGO Citation Generator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Baker, Michael J. The Marketing Book. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2002. https://htbiblio.yolasite.com/resources/Marketing%20Book.pdf. Schreiber, Trine. "Conceptualizing Students' Written Assignments in the Context of Information Literacy and Schatzki's Practice Theory." Journal of Documentation 70, no. 3 (2014): 346-363. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-01-2013-0002. Donahue, Bill. "King of the Mountains." Backpacker, September/October 2019. http://backpacker.eoncontent.ebscohost.com/2226647#&pageSet=39 Last name, First name or Organization Name.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Go to Notes and Bibliography: Sample Citations
The following examples illustrate the author-date system. Each example of a reference list entry is accompanied by an example of a corresponding in-text citation. For more details and many more examples, see of The Chicago Manual of Style . For examples of the same citations using the notes and bibliography system, follow the Notes and Bibliography link above.

Book

Reference list entries (in alphabetical order)

In-text citations

Chapter or other part of an edited book

In the reference list, include the page range for the chapter or part. In the text, cite specific pages.

Reference list entry

In-text citation

In some cases, you may want to cite the collection as a whole instead.

Reference list entry

In-text citation

Translated book

Reference list entry

In-text citation

E-book

For books consulted online, include a URL or the name of the database in the reference list entry. For other types of e-books, name the format. If no fixed page numbers are available, cite a section title or a chapter or other number in the text, if any (or simply omit).

Reference list entries (in alphabetical order)

In-text citations

Journal article

In the reference list, include the page range for the whole article. In the text, cite specific page numbers. For articles consulted online, include a URL or the name of the database in the reference list entry. Many journal articles list a DOI (Digital Object Identifier). A DOI forms a permanent URL that begins https://doi.org/. This URL is preferable to the URL that appears in your browser's address bar.

Reference list entries (in alphabetical order)

In-text citations

Journal articles often list many authors, especially in the sciences. If there are four or more authors, list up to ten in the reference list; in the text, list only the first, followed by ("and others"). For more than ten authors (not shown here), list the first seven in the reference list, followed by et al.

Reference list entry

In-text citation

News or magazine article

Articles from newspapers or news sites, magazines, blogs, and the like are cited similarly. In the reference list, it can be helpful to repeat the year with sources that are cited also by month and day. Page numbers, if any, can be cited in the text but are omitted from a reference list entry. If you consulted the article online, include a URL or the name of the database.

Reference list entries (in alphabetical order)

In-text citation

Readers' comments are cited in the text but omitted from a reference list.

In-text citation

Book review

Reference list entry

In-text citation

Interview

Reference list entry

In-text citation

Thesis or dissertation

Reference list entry

In-text citation

Website content

It is often sufficient simply to describe web pages and other website content in the text ("As of May 1, 2017, Yale's home page listed . . ."). If a more formal citation is needed, it may be styled like the examples below. For a source that does not list a date of publication or revision, use (for "no date") in place of the year and include an access date.

Reference list entries (in alphabetical order)

In-text citations

Social media content

Citations of content shared through social media can usually be limited to the text (as in the first example below). If a more formal citation is needed, a reference list entry may be appropriate. In place of a title, quote up to the first 160 characters of the post. Comments are cited in reference to the original post.

Text

Reference list entries (in alphabetical order)

In-text citations

Personal communication

Personal communications, including email and text messages and direct messages sent through social media, are usually cited in the text only; they are rarely included in a reference list.

In-text citation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th Edition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find it. Write it. Cite it. The Chicago Manual of Style Online is the venerable, time-tested guide to style, usage, and grammar in an accessible online format. ¶ It is the indispensable reference for writers, editors, proofreaders, indexers, copywriters, designers, and publishers, informing the editorial canon with sound, definitive advice.

# data[].attributes.body
You have to do an in-text citation and reference entry (reference list after you've finished your assignment). The links for the articles/journal entries/ books are posted down below. Post your answers (in-text ciations and references) into the next "Answers" section.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

The social scientific analysis of social class is attracting renewed interest given the accentuation of economic and social inequalities throughout the world. The most widely validated measure of social class, the Nuffield class schema, developed in the 1970s, was codified in the UK's National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) and places people in one of seven main classes according to their occupation and employment status. This principally distinguishes between people working in routine or semi-routine occupations employed on a 'labour contract' on the one hand, and those working in professional or managerial occupations employed on a 'service contract' on the other. However, this occupationally based class schema does not effectively capture the role of social and cultural processes in generating class divisions. We analyse the largest survey of social class ever conducted in the UK, the BBC's 2011 Great British Class Survey, with 161,400 web respondents, as well as a nationally representative sample survey, which includes unusually detailed questions asked on social, cultural and economic capital. Using latent class analysis on these variables, we derive seven classes. We demonstrate the existence of an 'elite', whose wealth separates them from an established middle class, as well as a class of technical experts and a class of 'new affluent' workers. We also show that at the lower levels of the class structure, alongside an ageing traditional working class, there is a 'precariat' characterised by very low levels of capital, and a group of emergent service workers. We think that this new seven class model recognises both social polarisation in British society and class fragmentation in its middle layers, and will attract enormous interest from a wide social scientific community in offering an up-to-date multi-dimensional model of social class.

Over the past decade, there has been a striking renewal of interest in the analysis of social class inequality, driven by accumulating evidence of escalating social inequalities, notably with respect to wealth and income, but also around numerous social and cultural indicators, such as mortality rates, educational attainment, housing conditions and forms of leisure participation (e.g. Bennett et al., 2008; Dorling, 2011; Hills, 2010; Wilkinson and Pickett, 2008). Theoretically, this interest has been influenced by the deployment of Pierre Bourdieu's conceptual armoury to elaborate a model of class linked not exclusively to employment inequalities, but to the interplay between economic, social and cultural capital (see Bennett et al., 2008; Crompton, 2008; Savage, 2010; Savage et al., 2005). This current of work, sometimes called 'cultural class analysis' ( Atkinson, 2010) has cross-fertilised with feminist currents (e.g. Adkins and Skeggs, 2005; Skeggs, 1997) to champion multi-dimensional approaches to the analysis of stratification ( Yuval-Davis, 2011).

This article contributes to this current by elaborating a new model of social class which shows how measures of economic, cultural and social capital can be combined to provide a powerful way of mapping contemporary class divisions in the UK. We analyse the largest survey of social class ever conducted in the UK, the BBC's Great British Class Survey (GBCS), a web survey with the unusually high number of 161,400 respondents, complemented by a parallel national representative survey. Using these two surveys in tandem allows us to provide unusual detail on the link between class and specific occupational, educational and geographical profiles which offer unparalleled insights into the organisation of class inequality in 2011-12. We will show that although a large 'rump' of the established middle (or 'service') class, and the traditional working class exists, there are five other classes which fit less easily into this conventional sociological framing, and which reveal the extent of social polarisation and class fragmentation in contemporary Britain.

Our analysis proceeds in five steps. Firstly, we discuss how our analysis represents a new phase in class analysis. Secondly, we introduce the two surveys. Thirdly, we explain our measures of economic, cultural and social capital. Fourthly, and most importantly, we explain how we combined our measures of the three capitals, using latent class analysis, to generate our new model of social class. Finally, we describe and explicate each of our seven classes, showing how they intersect with age and gender divisions, drawing out their specific occupational and educational profiles. In our conclusion we draw out our findings for the analysis of social class.

What Is Social Class?

We are now entering a third phase in the analysis of class and stratification. The first phase, which lasted to the 1980s, saw the dominance of 'moralising' official measures of class, enshrined in Britain in the Registrar General's Class schema, in which 'standing within the community' (replaced, at least nominally, by 'skill' in 1980) was used to draw a six-fold class schema, with professionals at the top, and unskilled manual workers at the bottom (see Szreter, 1984). In this period, sociological endeavour focused on critiquing these models in favour of more rigorous sociologically informed class schemas, variously deploying theoretical frameworks from Marx and Weber.

The second phase, from the 1970s, saw the triumph of this sociological critique, especially in the elaboration of the influential model of social class developed by John Goldthorpe and his associates at Nuffield College, Oxford University ( Erikson and Goldthorpe, 1992; Goldthorpe and Marshall, 1992; Goldthorpe et al., 1980; Marshall et al., 1988). Seeing off the rival Marxist framework of Erik Olin Wright (1985), the Erikson-Goldthorpe-Portocarero (EGP) model proved highly influential. This defined seven classes according to an individual's employment position.1 It fundamentally differentiated between employees and employers and, amongst the former, between those on a labour contract (routine, semi-routine, technical employees),2 and those in a more diffuse 'service relationship' with their employers (professionals and managers).

This class schema proved hugely influential in the overhaul of the official UK class schema, through the elaboration of the National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) ( Rose and O'Reilly, 1998; Rose and Pevalin, 2003). It has also been very important in the development of cross-national schemes for comparative analysis (e.g. Erikson and Goldthorpe, 1992; Rose and Harrison, 2007, 2010). The Goldthorpe class schema has rightly been of enormous significance, especially in the comparative analysis of social mobility. However, although it is clear that for certain purposes it continues to represent a 'gold standard' in the measurement of class, five main lines of criticism can be developed to point to ways in which its purview is limited.

Firstly, as a deductive class schema, the validation of the Goldthorpe class schema predominantly focuses on criterion validity, that is to say, the extent to which it measures those features of the employment relations which are held to define class relationships ( Evans and Mills, 2000).3 Whilst it does this reasonably well (e.g. McGovern et al., 2007), the schema has been shown to be of less use in explicating the wider cultural and social activities and identities (see generally Devine, 1998; Savage, 2000), which do not appear to be closely linked to people's class position, as defined by the Goldthorpe class schema, and alternative schemas have been proposed to explain patterns of cultural consumption ( Le Roux et al., 2008). Indeed, this point is recognised by Goldthorpe himself in his recent work with Chan which emphasises that the link between class and cultural consumption is limited ( Chan and Goldthorpe, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c).

Secondly, it is increasingly apparent that a major appeal of the schema lay as a pragmatic means of placing individuals into social classes using standard nationally representative surveys with a moderate sample size. This is especially important since preferred forms of categorical data analysis such as log-linear modelling required reasonable cell sizes.4 It is for these pragmatic reasons, for instance, that an 'elite' was not distinguished (see Penn, 1981) within the Goldthorpe class schema (see the discussion in Savage and Williams, 2008). Recently, however, Grusky and his colleagues have used surveys with larger samples to show quite distinctive differences between 'micro-classes' ( Butler and Savage, 1995; Devine, 2010; Grusky and Weeden, 2001, 2008; Savage et al., 1992; Weeden and Grusky, 2005; 2012). It might thus be argued that Goldthorpe's class schema is dependent on the hegemony of a particular model of the nationally representative sample survey (see Savage, 2010).

Thirdly, Goldthorpe adopted the standard sociological approach of abstracting class from measures of income and wealth in order to derive class from measures of employment. However, this analytical step has increasingly been criticised by economists who examine moves between income groups, rather than occupational classes, to measure changing patterns of social mobility ( Blanden and Machin, 2008; Blanden et al., 2004; Jenkins, 2011). Although Erikson and Goldthorpe (2010) have mounted a powerful defence of the value of occupational class measures, nonetheless it is possible that that income variation within occupations is growing and that if economic measures of inequality are to be kept within the purview of class analysis we need to go beyond measures of occupational class alone.

Fourthly, as feminist critics such as Crompton (2008), Skeggs (1997, 2004), and Bradley (1995) have insisted, a focus on occupations as the sole measure of class occludes the more complex ways that class operates symbolically and culturally, through forms of stigmatisation and marking of personhood and value. Such an appreciation requires a more culturally sensitive mode of analysis.

Fifth, although widely used in comparative studies of social mobility, the validity of the EGP scheme has been challenged. Recently, based on a comparative study of Britain, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland, Daniel Oesch (2006) questions several of the assumptions in the EGP scheme for lacking the ability to take highly important horizontal cleavages into account, for giving a too homogenous description of the salaried middle class and for overdoing the manual/non-manual divide when separating between male production workers and routine sales and service occupations. Comparative studies of industrial organisations (e.g. Maurice et al., 1986[1982]) also show that there are real cross-national differences with respect to qualification levels, job autonomy, career prospects (i.e. social mobility), organisation of production, etc. Two formally identical categories, e.g. 'skilled worker' or 'supervisor', may thus refer to clearly different occupational realities in the countries that are compared. Whereas this problem is acknowledged by Erikson and Goldthorpe (1992: 52), its fundamental implications are even so disregarded in the construction of the EGP scheme.

All these factors explain the appeal of developing a new, multi-dimensional way of registering social class differentiation. A highly influential scheme is that developed by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (1984), which argues that there are three different kinds of capital, each of which conveys certain advantages. He differentiates between (1) economic capital (wealth and income), (2) cultural capital (the ability to appreciate and engage with cultural goods, and credentials institutionalised through educational success), and (3) social capital (contacts and connections which allow people to draw on their social networks). Bourdieu's point is that although these three capitals may overlap, they are also subtly different, and that it is possible to draw fine-grained distinctions between people with different stocks of each of the three capitals, to provide a much more complex model of social class than is currently used. This recognition that social class is a multi-dimensional construct indicates that classes are not merely economic phenomena but are also profoundly concerned with forms of social reproduction and cultural distinction ( Devine, 2004; Savage et al., 2005),5 a perspective indeed used by some researchers working with the Goldthorpe class schema (e.g. Breen and Yaish, 2006; Sullivan, 2007). This allows us to reassert an interest in the classical Weberian problematic of 'class formation', through an examination of how stocks of the three capitals might combine to generate distinctive class boundaries.

Bourdieu's interventions have led to influential sociological studies across different nations ( Bennett et al., 2001, on Australia; Bennett et al., 2008, on the UK; Lamont, 1992, on the US and France). Hitherto, its application has been limited because comprehensive questions on cultural and social capital are rarely asked on national surveys. In addition, a large sample size is needed to unravel the interactions between these three capitals. It is therefore a major step forward that the BBC's Lab UK, in collaboration with its Current Affairs Department, decided in 2009 to commission a major web survey on social class. The BBC has been running interactive web surveys since 2001 and launched Lab UK in 2009 to host them. Most of the surveys to date have been oriented towards psychology, and the fact that they chose this as their first major sociological topic is itself a comment on the public renewal of interest in class. Our interest in collaborating with the BBC was linked to our view that sociologists need to be open to the possibility that innovations in digital data might provide valuable resources for sociological analysis ( Savage and Burrows, 2007).

The Great British Class Survey (GBCS)

The GBCS was designed to include questions to develop detailed measures of economic, cultural and social capitals. Its questions on cultural capital asked about people's leisure interests, musical tastes, use of the media, and food preferences. Many of the questions were similar to those used on the Cultural Capital and Social Exclusion survey ( Bennett et al., 2008), the most sophisticated study of cultural capital ever conducted in Britain, which has influenced numerous other studies across Europe (e.g. Prieur and Savage, 2011). The questions on social capital mainly take the form of 'position generator' developed by the American sociologist Nan Lin (2001) to measure the range of people's social ties. We asked respondents whether they knew anyone in 37 different occupations, which is the most complex and granular question of its type ever used in social research in any part of the world. The questions on economic capital asked not only about household income, but also savings and the value of owner-occupied housing, so allowing unusually detailed measures of economic capital. We also obtained extensive information about household composition, education, social mobility and political attitudes, to contextualise our measures of cultural, economic and social capital.

The web survey was launched on 26 January 2011, with extensive publicity across BBC television and radio, and newspaper coverage. Responses were enthusiastic and, by July 2011, 161,400 complete surveys had been submitted. However, examination of the data revealed that the GBCS web survey suffered from a strong selection bias, with respondents being predominantly drawn from the well-educated social groups. As one BBC journalist told us when we reported this problem, 'yes, you seem to have got a typical BBC news audience there'. To address this problem, the BBC therefore agreed to conduct a separate, nationally representative face-to-face survey using identical questions. This survey, with 1026 respondents, was conducted using quota sampling methods by the well-known survey firm GfK in April 2011. Tests from its field division and by ourselves indicate that its demographics are nationally representative. In this article we refer to the nationally representative survey as GfK and the web survey as GBCS.

Table 1 indicates the difference in the proportions of social class between these two surveys.6 Traditional professions are massively over-represented in the GBCS compared to the national figures from GfK, and senior managers and modern professionals are significantly over-represented. All manual workers are massively under-represented. Furthermore, comparisons with the Culture, Class, Distinction ( Bennett et al., 2008) study showed that it was not possible to simply weight the GBCS to deal with these skews because the GBCS respondents from routine classes turn out to be highly unrepresentative of their peers in these classes. They possess relatively more cultural and social capital than their peers, and indeed the very act of participating in the GBCS was a 'performative' way of claiming cultural stakes (as discussed by Bourdieu, 1984; Skeggs, 2004). Let us be clear, therefore, that GBCS alone cannot be used to derive a representative model of class. However, as we explain in section 4, by linking it to the GfK survey, we can overcome this problem in a way that allows us to combine nationally representative classes with the detailed educational, occupational and geographical profiles from the GBCS.

Measuring Social, Cultural and Economic Capital

A key first stage of our analysis was to use the GfK to examine the different questions probing economic, social and cultural capital in order to develop the most robust summary measures for each which we could then use to develop our new model of class.

Social Capital

The 37 occupations which respondents might report contacts with were coded to the widely validated Cambridge Social Interaction and Stratification (CAMSIS) scale, so that for every individual respondent we were able to assess how many of the 37 occupations they reported, the mean status scores of the occupations of their contacts (where the scores range from 85.3, the highest, to 4.5, the lowest), and their range (the extent of the difference between the highest and lowest status scores). This is the most elaborate data ever collected in the UK on this issue. Table 2 reports these figures, omitting contacts who are students, who have never worked, and who are aristocrats (the categories have no CAMSIS scores).

Summary statistics for social capital in the GBCS and GfK surveys.

Table 2 shows that the average respondent knows socially someone in 13.3 out of the 34 'valid' occupations that are asked about. The mean status score of their contacts is 40.9 and the mean range (the difference between the highest and the lowest of the scores of their contacts) is 62.4.

In our measures for social capital we used only two of these. We omitted 'range' because it is strongly correlated with number of contacts identified (if one knows more people, then this is likely to entail that the range will be greater). To summarise, our measures of social capital are as follows:

1. We used the mean status score of the occupations that respondents know (the higher the score, the higher the average status of the social contacts).

2. The mean number of social contacts reported (the higher the score, the more of the 34 occupations which are known).

Cultural Capital

The analysis of cultural capital is complex, and we do not have the scope in this article to enter the now extensive debate on its definition and measurement (though see Bennett et al., 2008; Prieur and Savage, 2011). Bourdieu (1984) differentiates between 'high' culture, associated with the arts, and 'popular' culture, but the clarity of this distinction has been questioned in much recent research (e.g. Bennett et al., 2008; Prieur and Savage, 2011; Warde and Gayo-Cal, 2009). In particular, it has been argued that elite culture has become more liberal and tolerant as the middle and upper classes have become more 'omnivorous', keen to partake of both highbrow and popular cultural forms.

We therefore needed to carry out an inductive analysis of cultural taste to reveal the patterning of activity without assuming a priori that certain kinds of activities were more 'highbrow' than others. Here, in line with other comparable studies ( Bennett et al., 2008), we conducted a specific multiple correspondence analysis (MCA)7 on 27 cultural variables on the nationally representative GfK to assess the structuring of cultural divisions.

In Figure 1, modalities represent leisure, musical, eating and holiday preferences. Those modalities with a + sign afterwards indicate that this activity is liked, or engaged in, and those with a minus (−) after it indicate that it is disliked or not engaged in. For the eating variables, L indicates liking, D indicates disliking. Finally, the size of the point is related to the frequencies of that variable amongst the sample (hence, liking shopping 'shop+' is much more common that going regularly to the theatre, 'theatre+').

Figure 1 shows that the first (x) axis differentiates the culturally disengaged from the engaged (on the left). Thus, we see most of the variables on the left with a + sign, and with those on the right having a negative sign. On the second 'y' axis of Figure 1, we can also distinguish, at the top, those interested in 'highbrow' cultural forms and, at the bottom, those attracted to popular forms of culture associated with sport, using information technology, and popular and contemporary music. This second axis indicates that there are now two main types of cultural capital: that associated with highbrow taste, and what we term 'emerging' cultural capital. Both of these are differentiated from those who are less culturally engaged on the measures that we use in the survey.8 Figure 2 superimposes three socio-demographic variables onto this cultural space: age, class of respondent and of main earner when the respondent was a child. It shows that the first axis is clearly aligned with social class, with the routine classes located on the disengaged right hand side of the y axis, whilst age distinguishes the middle-aged and elderly 'highbrows' from the more youthful middle classes attracted to 'emerging' cultural capital. This finding is consistent with other research on cultural engagement (e.g. Bennett et al., 2008) and points to the need to distinguish two different modes of cultural capital that do not necessarily overlap.9

In our following analysis, we use the two measures of cultural capital in accordance with our MCA ( Table 3). We have a measure of 'highbrow' cultural capital, which scores the extent of respondents' engagement with classical music, attending stately homes, museums, art galleries, jazz, theatre and French restaurants. The maximum score which a respondent could obtain (if they 'often' engaged in all these activities) is 30. A second score is for 'emerging' cultural capital, which is based on the extent of a respondent's engagement with video games, social network sites, the internet, playing sport, watching sport, spending time with friends, going to the gym, going to gigs and preferences for rap and rock. The maximum score here is 32.

Summary statistics for cultural capital.

Economic Capital

Finally, we have measures of economic capital. Here, we use three of our questions assessing household income, household savings and house price; we standardise household savings and house prices and combine these standardised variables to generate an 'assets' variable. The distribution of these variables is shown in Table 4. We should emphasise here that these measures are for the household, and that it is possible that some individuals who are not in well-paid jobs actually achieve high scores because of the earnings of other household members. We think that a household measure is preferable because it is more likely to tap the economic resources available to individuals; nonetheless, there are likely to be issues of gender inequality (in particular) which will be opaque to such measures.

Summary statistics for economic capital.

A Latent Class Analysis of Social Class

As we explained in section 2, we are not developing a deductive class schema, but are instead seeking to most parsimoniously differentiate between our measures of economic, social and cultural capital to assess where the main class boundaries are placed. We therefore elaborate a bottom-up, inductive, approach: if our variables are those which are most important for distinguishing between social classes, following Bourdieu, what are the classes that emerge? Our method, latent class analysis, finds the most parsimonious way to group people to classes. Latent class analysis is based on the idea that some parameters of a statistical model differ across unobserved subgroups, which form the categories of a categorical latent variable. It can be distinguished from factor analysis, which identifies continuous latent variables. While latent class analysis is primarily used for the analysis of categorical data, it can also be used for clustering with continuous variables - such a clustering procedure tends to outperform other non-hierarchical cluster analysis such as k-means clustering ( Vermunt and Magidson, 2003), and it is this method which we adopt here.10

We standardised the six variables specified in the previous section (mean status scores of contacts, total number of contacts, highbrow cultural capital, emerging cultural capital, income and assets), and we carried out a latent class analysis on this basis. In order to overcome the problem of sample skew, we combined cases from the GfK, for which we use the original weighting values, and the cases in the GBCS, which we weight with a value of 1/161400 for each case, so that combined they contribute the weight of a single case to the overall analysis. This means that the latent class analysis is derived from the nationally representative GfK survey, and that the results are not distorted by the unrepresentative web survey. However, the cases from the web survey can be classified within the same clusters as the cases from the nationally representative survey and hence we are able to allocate classes to all the respondents from the web-based GBCS derived from nationally representative data. The Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) is minimised at seven clusters (BIC = 12991.8): we therefore take this as our solution.

Our more sophisticated way of approaching class, looking at cultural, social and economic capitals (using different measures of economic capital) produces a complex map of seven classes. Table 5 briefly identifies these seven main classes, and lists the proportion of respondents from the GfK and GBCS who fit into these. Table 6 reports the detailed scores for each of the measures of capital associated with the latent classes. This is the bedrock of our analysis, and the rest of our article explicates and elaborates these seven classes.

Our interpretations of these seven classes are aided by Table 7 which indicates the socio-demographic correlates of these latent classes (also based also on the nationally representative GfK survey). In addition, we also draw on the granular detail provided by the GBCS survey which allows us much more detailed information on the specific jobs and geographical locations of the seven classes.11 Table 8 indicates the eight occupations that are most over-represented for each of our seven classes, as well as the percentage of GBCS respondents in such occupations that fall into these classes. Table 8 thus allows the occupational profiles of our seven classes to be examined.

These resources together allow us an unusually fine-grained and detailed way of interpreting the key characteristics of these classes. This is especially important in allowing us to move beyond a simple profiling of the differences between the classes to explicate the sociological processes that they reveal. To put the issue bluntly, we need to pull out sociologically meaningful class groups in order to demonstrate that our latent class analysis is producing relevant findings.

Before introducing our seven classes we need to reiterate that our method of defining class boundaries, drawing on measures of cultural, social and economic capital, is very different from that used in constructing the NS-SEC, and hence the two schemes do not compete directly with each other. However, to draw out the distinctive features of our model of class, we reflect on the different kinds of measures of class which they both articulate, and we therefore do comment on how 'our' class boundaries appear somewhat different to those which are evident from the NS-SEC.

Class 1: Elite

These are, on all dimensions, the most advantaged and privileged group in the UK. They are characterised by having the highest levels of every form of capital. Their mean household income is £89k, almost double that of the next highest class, and the average house price is £325k, considerably higher than any other class. Their average savings are also exceptionally high, well over double that of any other class. Fundamentally, this is a wealthy class, set apart from the other six classes on the basis of their economic advantages.

The elite have close to the highest number of social contacts, though partly for this reason their mean status score is not the highest of all the classes, but the second highest (since if one knows a large number of people, this makes it more likely for them to know both high and low status people). They also score the highest on 'highbrow' cultural capital, though by a less marked margin than for their economic capital, and they have moderately high scores on emerging cultural capital - so it would be unwise to just see them as highbrow.

Table 7 also reveals how membership of the elite is associated with other social advantages. They have the lowest proportion of ethnic minorities, the highest proportion of graduates, and over half come from families where the main earner was in senior management or the professions. They are clearly a relatively exclusive grouping, with restricted upward mobility into its ranks.

Table 8 underscores the occupational narrowness of this group. There are major over-representations of (especially) chief executive officers, IT directors, marketing and sales directors, financial managers and management consultants, along with elite professions of dentists and barristers. Graduates of elite universities are over-represented amongst their ranks, especially from Oxford, City, Kings College London, LSE, Cambridge, Bristol, London South Bank, Imperial College and Trinity College Dublin.13 Strikingly, six of these universities are located in London, only Trinity is from outside the south of England. Geographically (see Figure 3), their residences are all over-represented in the south east of England, and especially in areas close to London in the affluent Home counties.

Our findings thus clearly demonstrate the power of a relatively small, socially and spatially exclusive group at the apex of British society, whose economic wealth sets them apart from the great majority of the population. This finding allows us the prospect of re-integrating class analysis with the study of elites in a way which has not been possible over recent decades where no elite class was distinguished within the EGP, although its existence was recognised ( Erikson and Goldthorpe, 1992: 40).

Class 2: Established middle class

This second most advantaged class has a household income of £47k a year, owns a relatively expensive house worth £177k, and has moderately good savings of £26k. These are all good scores for economic capital and it competes with the technical middle class in being the second best well-off class. This is a much larger class than the elite, with a quarter of the population in its ranks, and might be seen as the comfortably off bulwark of British society, even though they do not share the extreme wealth of the elite. It might be seen as comprising the bulk of what Goldthorpe (1982; Goldthorpe et al., 1980) identifies as the professional and managerial 'service class'; it has a higher proportion of members working in management and the professions than any other class except the elite.

They have more social contacts (17) than any other social class and these tend to be high status (the third highest of any class). This therefore appears to be the most gregarious class, especially with other generally high status people (see Erikson, 1996). They are also highly culturally engaged, both for highbrow culture (the second highest scores), and also emerging cultural capital (also second). This is therefore a culturally omnivorous and well-off group, with strong social connections. Its members are highly secure across all three forms of capital, though they lack the marked wealth of the elite.

Table 7 shows that they also have a high proportion of graduates amongst their ranks, and a majority of their members work in the professions or management. They also tend to come from professional and managerial families. However, in some areas they are more open than the elite, especially with a higher representation amongst ethnic minorities.

Occupationally, this class does not see such marked over-representations of specific occupations as does the elite, though there are modestly high profiles for professionals working in public service, with some managerial jobs also scoring highly (see Table 8). However, in no case are these occupations more than 50 per cent more likely to be in this class than the GBCS as a whole, confirming that this class is recruited from a fairly broad occupational range. Educationally, a relatively large number of members are graduates. Geographically, the residences of this group tend to be located outside the south east of England, and mainly away from large towns or urban environments (see Figure 4). This is a 'provincial' formation, and is a sizeable bulwark of 'middle England': comfortably off, secure, and established.

Class 3: Technical middle class

This class is sociologically much more distinctive and original to our analysis. It is quite small, with only 6 per cent of the national population, but is relatively prosperous, with good mean household incomes (£38k), excellent household savings (£66k) and houses worth considerable amounts of money (£163k). It competes with the established middle class to be the second most prosperous class in terms of economic capital. This is clearly a prosperous group with a secure economic position in British society.

Socially and culturally, however, it is much more restricted than the established middle class. It reports the lowest number of social contacts of any of the classes (an astonishingly low average of four out of 34 possible contacts, compared to 17 for the established middle class), though these do tend to be high status. Its social circle is much more restricted than other social classes, and it presumably socialises nearly exclusively with other professional experts. This is an interesting riposte to those who think it is the poor or disadvantaged whose social networks are the most restricted. In fact, it is this comfortably off technical middle class who are by far the most limited here. Culturally, it also scores relatively low for both highbrow and emerging cultural capital and therefore appears to be relatively culturally disengaged. This class is distinguished by its relative social isolation as well as its cultural apathy.

Table 7 shows that it has a lower proportion of graduates and of employees in the professions and management, though the levels of over-representation are also relatively modest, and much less marked than for the elite. Aircraft pilots, for instance, are 78 per cent more likely to be in this class than in the GBCS as a whole. This seems therefore to be a group who has achieved good economic rewards often without distinctive credentials, or through working in established middle-class jobs. Perhaps surprisingly, it has an above-average proportion of women (59%).

We can obtain more detail by using the GBCS to focus our understanding of its profile. There is an over-representation of those doing research, scientific and technical forms of work (see Table 8). Amongst those graduates who are located within it, there are over-representations from established and prestigious universities with strong reputations for science, including Warwick, Cambridge, UCL, Southampton and Imperial. There is also a slight over-representation of graduates in science and technology. Members of this class are geographically located in the South East where scientific and technical jobs are likely to be found ( Figure 5), but shun the centre of London and tend to be located in suburban locations (perhaps consistent with their social isolation?).

We might see this class therefore as a group of scientifically and technically oriented people who have used their skills to gain reasonably secure and well-rewarded work, but who might not be seen as part of a more established middle class. Even though they are as likely as the established middle class to come from middle-class families, their degree of social and cultural disengagement is marked. We could see this group as indication of Savage's (2010) argument that in the second half of the 20th century we have witnessed the emergence of a distinctive technical group somewhat at odds with the larger section of the middle classes who are more oriented towards the arts and humanities.

Class 4: New affluent workers

This class scores highly on 'emerging' cultural capital, but scores low on highbrow cultural capital. It therefore seems to shun established forms of cultural capital though it is not culturally disengaged. Its household income is moderate, and its house value (£129k) is relatively high, and it has a small amount of savings. It is therefore economically secure without being very well off. Its members score the second highest on their number of social contacts, though the status scores tend to be moderate. Overall, this class scores moderately well on all three capitals, with a particular penchant for emerging cultural capital. They are a socially and culturally active class, whose economic capital is higher than for any class apart from the elite or two middle-class groupings.

Table 7 reveals some intriguing aspects of this group. They tend to come from non-middle-class families, and few have been to university. They are the most male of any of our seven classes, with 57 per cent being men. Amongst its relatively few members who are graduates, there are over-representations of graduates from some new universities (such as Liverpool Hope, Bolton, or the University of West England). As we might expect, it has a high proportion of young people. There is a considerable over-representation of various white collar and blue collar jobs, though largely in the private sector and in customer facing occupations: however, since only 5.4 per cent of the GBCS are in this class, only a modest proportion of these occupations (such as electricians and postal workers) are located in this class. They tend to be over-represented in old manufacturing centres of the UK, located outside the south east of England (see Figure 6).

This is a group whose members have not benefitted from conventional routes through education to middle-class positions, but have nonetheless achieved relatively secure economic positions and are also relatively socially and culturally engaged. They seem to have achieved their relative security without major inherited resources of economic or cultural capital. They actually form a significant part of the population, at 15 per cent, but cannot easily be identified as either middle or working class. We have used the term 'new affluent workers', with a nod to Goldthorpe and Lockwood's famous studies from the 1960s, to capture this complex and ambivalent role and sensitise us to the need to understand this as an unusually fluid grouping.

Class 5: Traditional working class

With class 5, we now move onto clearly less advantaged classes. Class 5 is a moderately poor class, with a mean household income of only £13k. However, its members predominantly own their homes, with an average house price of £127k, but it reports only modest savings. The range of social contacts is quite restricted at only 10, and the average status scores are moderate. Scores on highbrow cultural capital are moderate, and scores on emerging cultural capital are particularly low. This class therefore scores low on nearly every measure of capital, though is not completely deprived.

This class has few graduates, and traditional working-class occupations are over-represented amongst its number (e.g. lorry drivers, cleaners, electricians), as are some menial white collar occupations (e.g. legal and medical secretaries). This over-representation is considerable but since less than 2 per cent of the GBCS falls into this class, the absolute proportions are low and the occupations in Table 7 are indicative only. This class is predominantly female, more than any other class. Insofar as particular universities are over-represented, these are ones which tend to recruit mature or part-time students (such as Birkbeck and the Open University). It is strongly over-represented amongst old industrial areas outside the south east of England, especially in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (see Figure 7).

It is for these reasons that we might see this class as a residue of earlier historical periods, and embodying characteristics of the 'traditional working class'. We might see it as a 'throwback' to an earlier phase in Britain's social history, as part of an older generational formation.

Class 6: Emergent service workers

This has a modest household income of £21k, but is likely to rent and only has limited savings. This class does have a significant number of social contacts, who tend to be moderate in their status scores. The emerging cultural capital is higher for this class than for any other class, indicating a high degree of cultural engagement in youthful musical, sporting and internet activities, but highbrow cultural capital is low. This is therefore a marginal class in terms of its economic capital, but its social and cultural capital is high.

This class is relatively young, with a mean age of 34. There is an unusually high proportion of ethnic minorities within it. Its members tend not to be graduates or to come from middle-class families, yet they are very different from the traditional working class in being more culturally engaged with emerging cultural capital. They work in a variety of occupations, usually in the service sector, such as bar work, chefs, customer service occupations and call centre workers. This appears therefore to be a class of people who are 'making their way' in a range of relatively insecure occupations.

Educationally, those graduates who fall into their ranks include over-representations from well-known universities specialising in arts and humanities such as Goldsmiths, York,12 Birkbeck and SOAS, and indeed arts and humanities graduates are generally over-represented. This is very much an 'urban' grouping, with its members tending to live in cheaper locations within large cities, especially in the centre of London, and also in university towns (such as Aberystwyth or York) (see Figure 8).

In labelling this class, we decided to use the term 'emergent service workers', to recognise the extent to which they are a youthful grouping with high amounts of emergent cultural capital.

Class 7: Precariat

This is economically the poorest class, with a household income of only £8k, negligible savings, and they are likely to rent. Their social range is small with an average of seven contacts whose mean status is the lowest of any of the classes. The scores for both highbrow and emerging cultural capital are the lowest and second lowest, respectively, of any of the classes. This is clearly the most deprived of the classes that we have identified, on all measures, yet they form a relatively large social class, with 15 per cent of the population.

They are located in old industrial areas, but often away from the large urban areas. Stoke on Trent stands out as having a high over-representation, but London and the South East tends to score low (see Figure 9). Its members are unlikely to have attended university. Occupationally they are over-represented amongst the unemployed, van drivers, cleaners, carpenters, care workers, cashiers and postal workers, and they also include shopkeepers.

We use the term precariat in line with recent commentaries ( Standing, 2011) and as a reflection on the existence of a significant group characterised by high amounts of insecurity on all of our measures of capital.

Conclusion

In this article we have developed a new model of class in contemporary Britain. We should emphasise that this is a different kind of model to that developed by Goldthorpe and embedded in the NS-SEC, since it is an inductive, rather than deductive class schema. The two models are thus not in direct competition with each other, as we are not seeking to develop a better occupational- or employment-based measure of class. Rather, our model is designed to shed more light on how cultural and social boundaries operate in Britain and how this might suggest new lines of class division - an issue which the NS-SEC is less suitable for. Although our analysis here is necessarily quantitative, given our data, we would hope that it might cross fertilise with qualitative research to produce a more developed multi-dimensional approach.

We need to reiterate that our analysis is dependent on the measures used to construct the indicators of capitals. This is an obvious point which nonetheless needs to be underscored. Our measures of economic capital are relatively straightforward and should not cause undue concern, though we need to note that our use of measures of household income will obscure divisions within households and therefore that the relationships between gender and class will not be fully registered here. Our measures of social capital, using the widely validated Cambridge scores, are uncontroversial ( Stewart et al., 1973). On the other hand, our use of measures both of 'highbrow' and 'emergent' cultural capital provides a more nuanced understanding of cultural boundaries in the UK than might be evident from a more orthodox Bourdieusian focus on high culture alone. The extent to which such 'emerging' forms of activity represent a robust form of 'capital', which might compete with more established and legitimate forms, is an interesting finding which warrants further investigation.

Let us conclude by comparing our findings with more familiar measures of social class, to draw out the wider implications of our model. Firstly, although, as we have discussed, there are clear occupational profiles which map onto our seven classes, the fit is by no means clear. Given the way we have constructed our model, this is not necessarily surprising. Nonetheless, it suggests the need for caution towards those exercises, such as those of Grusky and Weeden (2001, 2008), which focus on micro-classes whereby specific occupations are clearly differentiated from each other. Leaving aside the particular case of chief executive officers who are predominantly located in our 'elite', we have found no clear affiliation between specific occupations and our latent classes. Perhaps, rather than seeking to locate class fundamentally in occupational 'blocks', the time is now ripe for a different, multi-dimensional perspective, in which occupational membership is spread (though unevenly) between different classes.

Secondly, it is striking that we have been able to discern a distinctive elite, whose sheer economic advantage sets it apart from other classes. Although this is not necessarily surprising, our analysis is the first time that this group has been elaborated within a wider analysis of the class structure, in which they are normally placed alongside a larger group of professionals and managers. Our finding here is an important critical intervention against the deployment of the 'service class' concept, which has failed to recognise the distinctiveness of elite groups within its number (see Savage and Williams, 2008), even though it does recognise the difference between an upper and lower service class. The fact that this elite group is shown to have the most privileged backgrounds also is an important demonstration of the accentuation of social advantage at the top of British society.

Thirdly, at the opposite extreme, we have discerned the existence of a sizeable group - 15 per cent of the population - which is marked by the lack of any significant amount of economic, cultural, or social capital. We have identified these as the 'precariat'. The recognition of the existence of this group, along with the elite, is a powerful reminder that our conventional approaches to class have hindered our recognition of these two extremes, which occupy a very distinctive place in British society.

Fourthly, only two of our seven classes conform to older sociological models of 'middle' and 'working' class. We might see this as some evidence of a blurring and fragmentation of conventional 'middle' and 'working' class boundaries. Of course, the nature of the class boundaries between middle and working class has been much discussed in previous studies of occupational classes, as with the debate about the 'labour aristocracy', and 'white collar workers'. Our way of interpreting these boundaries is to suggest that the 'established middle class' epitomises the characteristics of 'service class' as elaborated by John Goldthorpe (1982). As Goldthorpe anticipates, this is a large class, indeed the largest single class in our analysis, with a quarter of the population belonging to it. To this degree, the stable middle class are indeed a large group in British society. It does come over as secure and established across all our measures of capital.

The traditional working class might also appear to be its counterpart: the surviving rump of the working class, but they now only comprise 14 per cent of the population, and are relatively old, with an average age of 65. To this extent, the traditional working class is fading from contemporary importance, and clearly is less prominent than the established middle class.

However, only 39 per cent of the national population fall into these two classes, which conform most closely to these middle and working-class sociological stereotypes. Instead, the majority fall into classes which have not been registered by more conventional approaches to class, and require a more fluid understanding of the redrawing of social and cultural boundaries in recent years. Several of the classes thus have over-representations from white collar and blue collar jobs. The 'collar' line is of little value in unravelling these patterns.

Fifthly, some of these new classes do not embody conventional cultural or social capital, yet appear to have obtained moderate levels of economic capital. Here, a conventional Bourdieusian analysis which focuses unduly on the reproduction of educational advantage misses the way that both the new affluent workers and the emergent service workers have acquired certain levels of economic and social capital without access to conventional highbrow culture.

The technical middle class are also a powerful reminder that not all those with economic capital have extensive social networks, and the new affluent workers are revealing too as an interstitial class. We are thus able to challenge the perception that the problem of social and cultural engagement is more marked at the lower levels of the class structure.

The 'new affluent workers' and the 'emergent service workers' are an interesting focus. They seem, in many respects, to be the children of the 'traditional working class', and they might thus be said to exemplify the stark break in working-class culture which has been evident as a result of de-industrialisation, mass unemployment, immigration and the restructuring of urban space. They show high levels of engagement with 'emerging cultural capital' and have extensive social networks, so indicating that they are far from being disengaged in any conventional sense. To this extent, new social formations appear to be emerging out of the tendrils of the traditional working class.

Finally, in conclusion, our new model of class offers a powerful way of comprehending the persistence, yet also the remaking of social class divisions in contemporary Britain. Our multi-dimensional analysis reveals the polarisation of social inequality (in the form of an elite and a precariat), and the fragmentation of traditional sociological middle and working-class divisions into more segmented forms. We have been able to mine down into unusual detail about the educational and occupational profiles of these classes (and our future publications will do this further). We hope that our new model of class will prove a valuable resource for future social researchers in exploring the complex and multi-dimensional nature of social class inequality in the UK in a way which permits us to recognise the ongoing salience of social class divisions in the stratification of British society.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank BBC's Lab UK for making this Great British Class Survey data available, and especially Richard Cable, Mike Orwell and Kathy Neal. We would also like to thank numerous colleagues who have assisted with the work, notably at the ESRC Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (CRESC) at the University of Manchester, and the York European Centre for Cultural Exploration. Roger Burrows and Laurie Hanquinet assisted at different times with aspects of the analysis. Several colleagues have given valuable advice, notably Juoni Kuha (LSE).

Funding
We would like to acknowledge the funding provided by the ESRC Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (CRESC) at the University of Manchester which assisted in the analysis of the data. The BBC provided no financial resources to support the research.

Notes

References

Blanden, J, Machin, S (2008) Up and down the generational income ladder in Britain: Past changes and future prospects. National Institute Economic Review 205(1): 101-16. |
Google Scholar SAGE Journals

Blanden, J, Goodman, A, Gregg, P, Machin, S (2004) Changes in intergenerational income mobility in Britain. In: Corak, M (ed.) Generational Income Mobility in North America and Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 122-46. |
Google Scholar Crossref

Breen, R, Yaish, M (2006) Testing the Breen-Goldthorpe Model of educational decision-making. In: Morgan, SL, Grusky, DB, Fields, GS (eds) Mobility and Inequality: Frontiers of Research from Sociology and Economics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 232-58.
Google Scholar

Devine, F (1998) Class analysis and the stability of class relations. Sociology 32(1): 23-42. |
Google Scholar SAGE Journals

Penn, R (1981) The Nuffield Class Categorisation. Sociology 15(2): 265-71. |
Google Scholar SAGE Journals

Sullivan, A (2007) Cultural capital, cultural knowledge and ability. Sociological Research Online 12(6)1. Available at: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/6/1.html
Google Scholar

Yuval-Davis, N (2011) The Politics of Belonging: Intersectional Contestations. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Author biographies

Mike Savage is Professor of Sociology at the London School of Economics, having previously worked at the universities of Lancaster, Sussex, Surrey, Keele, North Carolina, Manchester and York. His research interests are in class and stratification, especially their cultural and historical dimensions. His recent books include Identities and Social Change in Britain since 1940: The Politics of Method (Oxford University Press, 2010), and Culture, Class, Distinction (with Tony Bennett, Elizabeth Silva, Alan Warde, Modesto Gayo-Cal and David Wright, Routledge, 2008).

Fiona Devine is Professor of Sociology and Head of the School of Social Sciences at the University of Manchester, UK. Her research interests are in social stratification and mobility in comparative perspective. She is the author of numerous publications including Class Practices (Cambridge University Press, 2004) and Doing Social Science, edited with Sue Heath (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009).

Niall Cunningham is Research Associate in Quantitative Analysis at the ESRC Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (CRESC) at the University of Manchester. He has a particular interest in the spatial analysis of ethnic/social participation, segregation and conflict. He is a co-author of Troubled Geographies: A Spatial History of Religion and Conflict in Ireland since the Famine (Indiana University Press, 2013).

Mark Taylor is Teaching Fellow at the University of York, and is in the last stages of completing his doctorate at Nuffield College, Oxford. He is an expert in quantitative analysis, especially of panel data, with specific interests in cultural sociology, and reading patterns.

Yaojun Li is Professor of Sociology at the Institute for Social Change, University of Manchester, UK. His research interests are in social mobility, social capital, and the socio-economic integration of minority ethnic groups, with particular emphasis on comparative analysis. He has published widely in these areas. He has also conducted many projects funded by academic and government bodies in Britain, the USA, China and Australia.

Johs. Hjellbrekke is Professor of Sociology at the University of Bergen, Norway. His research interests are in social stratification, social mobility and in statistical analysis of categorical data. He has published widely on social elites, classes, mobility and geometric data analysis.

Brigitte Le Roux is Associate Professor of Mathematics at Université de Paris Descartes and was recently awarded the Honoris Causa Doctor of Uppsala University. She is a leading international authority on multiple correspondence analysis.

Sam Friedman is Lecturer in Sociology at City University London. He has published widely on comedy, class and social mobility, and is the author of Comedy and Distinction: The Cultural Currency of a 'Good' Sense of Humour (Routledge, 2014). He is also a comedy critic and the publisher of Fest, the largest magazine covering the Edinburgh Festival Fringe.

Andrew Miles is Reader in Sociology at the ESRC Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (CRESC) at the University of Manchester. He has previously taught at the universities of Warwick, Cardiff and Keele. Having written widely on the history of stratification and mobility, including Social Mobility in Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century England (Palgrave Macmillan, 1999), he is currently working on the social dynamics of cultural participation and policy since 1945 and leads a major interdisciplinary study of everyday participation and cultural value funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A New Model of Social Class? Findings from the BBC's Great British Class Survey Experiment - Mike Savage, Fiona Devine, Niall Cunningham, Mark Taylor, Yaojun Li, Johs Hjellbrekke, Brigitte Le Roux, Sam Friedman, Andrew Miles, 2013

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract The social scientific analysis of social class is attracting renewed interest given the accentuation of economic and social inequalities throughout the world. The most widely validated measure of social class, the Nuffield class schema, developed in the 1970s, was codified in the UK's National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) and places people in one of seven main classes according to their occupation and employment status.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In case you missed this on my other social media, in January 2019, Lady Science published a podcast about my career and feminism. I was interviewed in late 2018 by Leila McNeill, one of the editors-in-chief. Below is an excerpt where you can learn a little about my professional history. I discuss how racial minority sociologists are challenging knowledge production in our field. I show how the concept of otherness is feeding the overt political resurgence of White nationalism. Then I cover the importance of intersectionality in sociological practice. Leila: To kick off our series I'll be talking with Zuleyka Zevallos, a sociologist from Australia, about the history of sociology, how the work of Indigenous and minority sociologists is changing the field, and how intersectional feminism influences her work. Leila: Without further ado, I'll let Zuleyka introduce herself.
Z. Zevallos: Yep, so my name's Zuleyka Zevallos. I'm a sociologist, and I've got a PhD in sociology. I started off doing research on the intersections of identity from migrant background women. I was really interested in how their experiences of gender, sexuality, ethnicity and also religion made their sense of identity, and how that also interconnected with their experiences of racism and multiculturalism, and how all of that affected their sense of belonging to their communities, as well as broader Australian society.

Z. Zevallos: After I finished my PhD I've been teaching the whole way through, and then I was an academic for a little while. I taught the sociology of gender and sexuality as well as leading courses on ethnicity and race. I also looked at the impact of technology on society...

Z. Zevallos: I spent the first few years working with an interdisciplinary social modelling team. That was a really great experience because it really taught me different applications of sociology, but also how to speak to scientists from the natural and physical sciences, from computer sciences, and how to blend their disciplines with mine.

Z. Zevallos: After that I have done quite a lot of different things. I tend to be a very passion-oriented, very project-based, so I've done things like ... I led a research team working on an investigation looking at health and safety issues in the workplace for emergency service workers who had contracted high rates of cancer in Country Victoria.

Z. Zevallos: I've also worked with a couple not-for-profit organisations looking at gender equity in STEM, as well as gender violence and domestic and family violence against women and their children. That leads me to the present day where I've come back into public service.

Z. Zevallos: Now I'm working with a behavioural science team. We're looking at, essentially, how to use social sciences, behavioural sciences, to improve services, programs and social policy. My areas have been working with vulnerable people, as well as the educational and employment outcomes of vocational students - so apprentices and trainees.

What is sociology?
Leila: Awesome. I guess people might have an idea of what sociology is based on what you were just talking about, but if you could give a brief explanation of what sociology is.
Z. Zevallos: Sure. Sociology is the study of society, but more specifically we look at how social structures shape people's sense of belonging as well as experiences of inequality and power.

Z. Zevallos: We're really looking at the nexus between personal biography, history, and culture. There are other social sciences that will look more at the individual in terms of their personality or group interactions. That's an aspect of psychology for example, whereas we look at individuals in their social context, so we're looking at how societies are organised across time and place, and how individuals are making choices within that context.

Z. Zevallos: Most people will have a sense that their lives are very unique, which of course every individual's understandings of their own lives is going to vary, and it's informed by them, families, just their own experiences growing up and whatever's happening to them at the time, however sociologists are able to look at the broader social patterns that informs the social behaviour of individuals.

Z. Zevallos: For example, we tend to feel like when we're making choices they're very intimate, they're very personalised, but at the same time sociologists are able to show that there are patterns in this behaviour when we're making decisions, whether it's something like our finances or our families or our personal health. All of that is socially influenced, even when we're not conscious about those influences.

Z. Zevallos: Sociology's about unpacking what we take for granted, about everyday life. We're looking at things like culture, to non-verbal cues, to looking at how people can resist social dynamics or how they go along with particular trends that are set up by social institutions.

Z. Zevallos: We're also looking at some of those bigger influences, like institutions like the media, education, as well as social dynamics like class, race, gender, sexuality, and so on.

Racism in sociology
Leila: Like most scientific fields, sociology has historically been predominantly white and male to the exclusion of women of color, and to a lesser extent white women, and also of course, racial minorities, sexual minorities, so many others. How has this exclusion shaped the field?
Z. Zevallos: Yeah, this is a question that I and many other minority sociologists think a lot about. One of the things that's distinct about sociology compared to a lot of other sciences is that we're not just founded to observe document and understand social phenomena. We're actually set up from the beginning to transform society.

Z. Zevallos: Our discipline is about driving social change, fighting inequality. We do say our charge has really been about shaping better outcomes for other people. We've developed these really important ways to think about and promote social justice, but at the same time sociology does suffer from the same afflictions as all the other social sciences, physical and other sciences, and the natural sciences as well.

Z. Zevallos: The fact is that sociology was founded by White men operating from Western European traditions, and our founders did work very deeply engaged with how sociology needed to be applied outside of scholarly racial, so that we could affect policy and lay public change.

Z. Zevallos: At the same time, there's been ongoing work since the beginning by Black, Indigenous, and other people of color across the world who took up sociology, however our work has generally pushed the periphery of our discipline. Even if we look back to the early 1900s with the Black American sociologist, Du Bois, who was thinking about the double consciousness of Black Americans or even to the present day works of Professor Aileen Moreton-Robinson who was looking at Aboriginal women's challenges to White feminism.

Z. Zevallos: We've always had minority sociologists who have challenged the way that we look at social problems, what it means to be a sociologist and how sociology needs to be undertaken.

Z. Zevallos: I guess what we do, minority sociologists, whether ethnic racial minorities, or sexual minorities, gender minorities, we're really trying to question whose interests are being served by the way in which sociology's being positioned.

Z. Zevallos: We're looking at questions like who leads the research. What examples are being used in our textbooks in classrooms? Who's being cited? Who's not being cited? Whose work is funded and why? How are research and policy questions being framed?

Z. Zevallos: Were really using, I guess the tool of sociology to question the way in which White, male-dominated frameworks are being used by our colleagues. Even though sociologists really place quite a lot of emphasis on reducing inequality, one of the things that minority sociologists try to do is to encourage White sociologists and people in dominant groups to turn the sociological gaze to themselves. Sociologists are very good at doing that for other groups and we tend to not do it very well for ourselves as practitioners...

Z. Zevallos: A lot of us are very committed to decolonizing sociology, so unpacking how colonial history has impacted the way in which we think about knowledge and our methods...

Otherness
Leila: I wanna talk a little bit about how otherness functions in sociology, and how it functions in your work specifically. Your blog is titled The Other Sociologist, so I know that it's pretty integral to what you do.
Z. Zevallos: Otherness has always been a theme in my thinking and in my interests from when I was actually still very young. My blog is ... it always has a central factor on otherness because it's a way to push us to always think about who's, I guess, how social relationships and dynamics are framed. I guess to take a step back, the concept of otherness is a way to think about how different social relationships are set up as oppositional forces.

Z. Zevallos: There's been a lot of work from Simone de Beauvoir to Zygmunt Bauman and other theorists who have tried to capture the way in which we as a society categorise difference. Otherness is about these dichotomies where the primary reference point, so it might be man, is set up as having more power than the secondary social identity.

Z. Zevallos: The opposite of man might be woman for example. The second reference point is being degraded, is being oppressed, and that first social reference point is the one that becomes the norm, the one that's seen as universal. If woman is the other of man, then stranger is the other of native, enemy is the other of friend. It's them versus us.

Z. Zevallos: That's what the concept of otherness is really trying to get at. It's an important concept because it has applications in every social realm we could think about. The work on the sociology of gender for example, otherness allows us to think about how humanity's being defined as being male throughout history.

Z. Zevallos: It's men who define what it means to be both a man, and what it means to be a woman. Women don't really have a value other than being a reference point for men. Women regarded as not being autonomous. Women are being defined and differentiated in reference to men. Women are basically not essential. Women are subjects. Women are different, less than, other to men.

Z. Zevallos: It's important in bringing out ideas of power as well, so otherness is about how if we have one group, in terms of race it might be white people, a group of people who are dominant either in numbers or dominant due to their resources and social standing. Their identity becomes naturalised. It's just taken for granted.

Z. Zevallos: Others, people who don't conform to that ideal, who can't belong to that dominant group, they tend to be punished. They tend to be seen as not worthy of the same respect. Otherness is also important in showing us who owns material wealth, who owns symbolic power in society.

Z. Zevallos: Symbolic power are things like the benefits that we get through our social networks. Otherness is important in thinking about how social institutions reproduce, who is the ideal versus the other. Media, education, religion, tend to have particular representations of who is the authority, and then everybody else is subservient to that ideal group.

Z. Zevallos: In terms of racism, basically a group of people who will always have more power than other groups, even if they as individuals feel like they're not particularly powerful, and again in a Western country it might be White people. Certainly that's the case in Australia, United States and other colonial nations. There's a lot of power that comes with being the group that is never going to be defined as the other, as different, in Australia, which are very reminiscent of ongoing characterisations of race, in the United States and in the U.K.

Z. Zevallos: For example we're really seeing these resurgence of White nationalism. We're seeing a senator who tried to bring in a motion of ... literally says that they wanted to discuss that 'It's okay to be White,' and that person is White. Almost all of our politicians are White. So there's this resurgence of nationalism which is trying, it is working through a notion of otherness because they're taking the fact that there are multiple platforms for minority groups to challenge whiteness that's seen as a threat to the authority, the power of the primary reference group, so that's White people.

Z. Zevallos: Even though White people continue to have decision making power, continue to have all of the resources, including the fact that White people can bring in these motions to discuss, to defend their whiteness in our Parliament, this functions through otherness because it's trying to reassert oppression that White nationalism has always perpetuated in trying to make it normal, so trying to invert this idea of reverse racism, which doesn't actually exist. This idea that White people are being disadvantaged because minority groups are using social media in their own publications, their own media to actually question narratives of whiteness that that's somehow taking away the power of white people, when in fact we have such a long way to go.

Z. Zevallos: Our parliament doesn't reflect the diversity of Australia. We have a very low number of Indigenous people in Parliament and other decision-making roles. The importance of understanding otherness is that there's always a group that uses resources and public dialogue to continually reassert that their reign is natural, that their power is preordained, that the only way that we can establish law and order, it's the only way we can have stability, and it's a way of really reinforcing oppression in 2018, as it always has been since colonial times.

Intersectionality
Leila: One of the things that you emphasise in your work is that you approach it from an intersectional feminist point of view, and this is different from the White feminist that you were speaking about earlier. Could you explain a little bit about how an intersectional framework shapes the research that you do, and how that makes your work different from a sociologist who does not adopt that point of view.
Z. Zevallos: Yeah, so intersectionality is a concept that was developed by Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, who is a professor of law by training. She is a Black American woman. The concept of intersectionality looks at how gender inequality's impacted by racism and by other types of structural inequalities.

Z. Zevallos: It's important to understand that it was first and foremost developed by a Black woman to better understand the disadvantages that are faced by other Black women. In that early work published in 1989, it was about industrial relations law, and it used a case study of Black women in the workplace showing that even in the late 1980s the law was forcing Black women to choose when they sought support, that they could only choose bringing forward a case on the grounds of sexism or on the grounds of racism, when in fact Black women face both of those dynamics at the same time.

Z. Zevallos: One of the things that often gets confused in the way people now use the term intersectionality is that, White women in particular, continue to remove the racial dynamic out of that. It's really important to always have a focus on both race and gender, and then to also think about other issues like sexuality, class, age, location.

Z. Zevallos: Intersectionality's really encouraging us to look at problems as being multifaceted. It's really a framework for thinking about how multiple social dynamics have a compounding disadvantage for minority women. That's not to say that white women can't use intersectionality usefully. In fact it would be advantageous for everybody to adopt these lens when looking at social problems, but it just means that we also need to interrogate our own race, our own gender position, and other social dynamics when we're thinking about problems.

Z. Zevallos: It's interesting actually to watch, particularly in social media, when white women will adopt these phrase of being an intersectional feminist, which is a label that doesn't really make sense and that's really rejected by women of color because it's not a label, it's not an identity, it's not something you can crown yourself to be intersectional feminist.

Z. Zevallos: Intersectionality is a theory that needs to be applied. It's a verb. It's about putting those ideas into practice into the way in which we position our own situation, as well as how we look at social inequality more broadly...

Z. Zevallos: I did also want to point out that intersectionality's not actually about identities, and Crenshaw has always made that point really explicit. People who think about this as identity politics in the negative way, or people who, even when they're trying to show solidarity will adopt intersectionalities and identity, it doesn't actually make sense because the power of intersectionality is a framework. It's that it's allowing us to think about social structures and how they lead to very material outcomes.

Z. Zevallos: For Black women in the workplace who are experiencing multiple forms of disadvantage, that impacts on their health, that impacts on their job prospects, it impacts on their income. It impacts on their ability to raise complaints when negative things are happening to them in the way in which they're being managed.

Z. Zevallos: One approach of using intersectionality in sociology, although sociology in the way in which we are set up as I mentioned about social justice, it's very compatible to intersectionality, and sociologists have for many decades studied the intersections of social oppression.

Z. Zevallos: In Australia this work began in the 1970s and built up over the 1980s and 1990s, looking at the intersections of race, gender, class for Aboriginal women, and for migrant background women. That is the work that I draw on for my honors thesis and my PhD thesis.

Z. Zevallos: It impacts my work because rather than looking at these things in isolation, it's important to look at how, let's say migrant background woman in Australia, how she experiences her family is intimately woven into how both the migrant community and border Australian community sets up gender dynamics, sets up powers of racial relations, and how religion as an institution also has both gender, class, and racial and other dynamics built in.

Z. Zevallos: It's about having a more complex understanding of social institutions and their impacts on all people, but especially Black women and other minority women as well.

***
We talk more on my research on migrant women, science and inequality. Listen to the rest on Lady Science.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In case you missed this on my other social media, in January 2019, Lady Science published a podcast about my career and feminism. I was interviewed in late 2018 by Leila McNeill, one of the editors-in-chief. Below is an excerpt where you can learn a little about my professional history.

# data[].attributes.body
https://endnote.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our policy towards the use of cookies

All Clarivate Analytics websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.

With EndNote X9, you can leave behind the tedious work of formatting bibliographies, finding full text, and searching for references.

EndNote X9 can help you research smarter.

As a researcher, you're constantly juggling different roles and demands on your time.

Smarter Teamwork

Share selected groups of references, manage team access, and track activity and changes

Smarter Insights

Uncover the impact of references and find the best-fit journal for your papers

Smarter Workflow

Automatically create, format, and update bibliographies, with the convenience of remote access

See what EndNote can do

Citation Report

Find out the impact and relevance of a group of references, simply and quickly, right from your EndNote desktop, with your Web of Science subscription

Manuscript Matcher

Take the guesswork out of journal submission - find the best fit journals for your paper

Find full text for references in one click from your EndNote desktop

Need an EndNote Site License for your institution?

By providing an institutional site license for EndNote X9, you can help your students and faculty research smarter.

Clarivate

Accelerating innovation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our policy towards the use of cookies All Clarivate Analytics websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser. With EndNote X9, you can leave behind the tedious work of formatting bibliographies, finding full text, and searching for references.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.zotero.org