Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:57:44.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Construction and Use of an Occupational Class Scale*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

Bernard R. Blishen
Bernard R. Blishen*
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Get access

Abstract

The construction and use of occupational scales to serve as an index of social class have recently absorbed much of the time of sociologists in the United States. In Canada, on the other hand, very few studies of this nature have been published. This paper will outline the method used in the construction of such a scale, and the results obtained when it is applied to certain features of Canadian society.

The problems involved in the methodology of studies of stratification result partly from the lack of agreement among sociologists on a theoretical framework in this field, and partly from the lack of precise tools of measurement. The theoretical difficulties involved can be seen from an examination of four main lines of theoretical development in the works of Marx, Weber, Warner, Davis, and Parsons.

The individual's position in the system of production was seen by Marx as the fundamental determinant of class position. A subjective awareness of class is another vital element in his theory although such awareness follows from the objective position. The objective economic foundation of class is an important aspect of Max Weber's theory also, but unlike Marx, Weber gives equal importance to subjective awareness, and he shows the importance of power as well. The approach of W. L. Warner, which has been followed by so many sociologists, emphasizes the subjective awareness and claims that class is what people in the community say it is. It is the consensus of people about other people's position, and about the class divisions in the social structure.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , November 1958 , pp. 519 - 525
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1958

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

A revised and condensed version of a paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association in Edmonton, June 5, 1958.

References

1 Two pertinent studies are: Charles, Enid, The Changing Size of the Family in Canada (Ottawa, 1948), 95–7Google Scholar; and Tuckman, Jacob, “The Social Status of Occupations in Canada,” Canadian Journal of Psychology, I, 06, 1947, 71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 I am indebted to my former colleagues in the Health and Welfare Division of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, especially Mr. Walter Bluger, for their help with the arrangement and compilation of many of the data on which this study is based.

3 See, respectively: Bendix, R. and Lipset, S. M., “Karl Marx' Theory of Social Class” in Bendix, R. and Lipset, S. M., eds., Class, Status, and Power (Glencoe, Ill., 1953), 26–35 Google Scholar; Weber, Max, “Class, Status, Party” in Gerth, H. H. and Mills, C. Wright, trs. and eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York, 1946), 186–93Google Scholar; Warner, W. L. et al., Social Class in America (Chicago, 1949)Google Scholar; Davis, Kingsley, Human Society (New York, 1949), 364–91Google Scholar; Parsons, Talcott, Essays in Sociological Theory (enlarged ed., Glencoe, Ill., 1954), 386–439.Google Scholar

4 Barber, Bernard, Social Stratification (New York, 1957), 1–18.Google Scholar

5 Essays in Sociological Theory, 386–439.

6 Barber, , Social Stratification, 1–18.Google Scholar

7 Inkeles, Alex and Rossi, Peter, “National Comparisons of Occupational Prestige,” American Journal of Sociology, LXI, no. 4, 01, 1956, 329–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Kahl, Joseph A. and Davis, James A., “A Comparison of Indexes of Socio-Economic Status,” American Sociological Review, XX, 1955, 317–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Rossi, Peter H. and Inkeles, Alex, “Multidimensional Ratings of Occupations,” Sociometry, XX, no. 3, 09, 1957, 234–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Hatt, Paul K., “Occupation and Social Stratification,” American Journal of Sociology, LV, 05, 1950, 533–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Canada, Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Census of Canada, 1951, X (Ottawa, 1956), Table 62.Google Scholar

12 Ibid., V, Table 21; IV, Table 11. Additional information supplied by D.B.S., Census Analysis Section.

13 A number of technical problems had to be overcome in bringing about this result. First of all, in the census, each occupation was broken down according to sex. Occupations therefore were ranked according to sex, but where a category for either sex had a total frequency of less than one-tenth of the frequency for the same category for the opposite sex it was omitted. The final list contained a number of occupations which were repeated, once for women with their combined standard score, and once for men with theirs. Another problem concerned the occupations in the residual category reported by the census, such as “other,” “miscellaneous,” and so on. They were included in the calculation of averages, standard scores, and rank, but were deleted from the final list.

Difficulty was encountered in determining income for some groups. The census reports individuals according to their occupations and designates them as self-employed or as wage-earners; but income is reported for wage-earners only. It is, however, possible to determine the ratio of self-employed to wage-earners. Where this ratio was greater than 10 per cent the earnings of the self-employed were included when they were available from the following source: Canada, Dept. of Internal Revenue, Income Tax Statistics, 1951 (Ottawa, 1952).Google Scholar

14 ”Jobs and Occupations: A Popular Evaluation” in Bendix, and Lipset, , eds., Class, Status and Power, 411–26.Google Scholar

15 ”National Comparisons of Occupational Prestige.”

16 An additional scale for the U.S.S.R. was included in that study but has not been included here.

17 The percentage distribution of all occupations according to class is as follows: Class 1, 2.0 per cent; Class 2, 14.3 per cent; Class 3, 9.6 per cent; Class 4, 7.0 per cent; Class 5, 32.9 per cent; Class 6, 24.4 per cent; Class 7, 8.7 per cent.

18 The use of data concerning the origin of census respondents has a number of drawbacks, but despite their limitations these data have a degree of reliability which cannot be gainsaid. See Ryder, N. B.. “The Interpretation of Origin Statistics,” this Journal, XXI, no. 4, 11, 1955, 466.Google Scholar