Difference between revisions of "Hilbert1990"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Richard Hilbert; |Title=Ethnomethodology and the micro-macro order |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; |Key=Hilbert1990 |Year=1990 |Journa...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Richard Hilbert; | + | |Author(s)=Richard Hilbert; |
|Title=Ethnomethodology and the micro-macro order | |Title=Ethnomethodology and the micro-macro order | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Ethnomethodology; |
|Key=Hilbert1990 | |Key=Hilbert1990 | ||
|Year=1990 | |Year=1990 | ||
|Journal=American Sociological Review | |Journal=American Sociological Review | ||
|Volume=55 | |Volume=55 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Number=6 |
| + | |Pages=794–808 | ||
|URL=http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095746 | |URL=http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095746 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.2307/2095746 | ||
|Abstract=Within the micro-macro debate, ethnomethodology is generally cast as microsociology. This is misleading given that ethnomethodology is indifferent to structure at any level. Instead, ethnomethodology transcends the terms of the debate with a focus on empirical social practices whereby both microstructure and macrostructure are produced by and for the membership. This is also true of conversation analysis. Modifying Collins's "interaction ritual chains" to include this indifference to structure expands ethnomethodological understanding as well as Collins's theory. | |Abstract=Within the micro-macro debate, ethnomethodology is generally cast as microsociology. This is misleading given that ethnomethodology is indifferent to structure at any level. Instead, ethnomethodology transcends the terms of the debate with a focus on empirical social practices whereby both microstructure and macrostructure are produced by and for the membership. This is also true of conversation analysis. Modifying Collins's "interaction ritual chains" to include this indifference to structure expands ethnomethodological understanding as well as Collins's theory. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:29, 21 October 2019
| Hilbert1990 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Hilbert1990 |
| Author(s) | Richard Hilbert |
| Title | Ethnomethodology and the micro-macro order |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Ethnomethodology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1990 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | American Sociological Review |
| Volume | 55 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 794–808 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.2307/2095746 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Within the micro-macro debate, ethnomethodology is generally cast as microsociology. This is misleading given that ethnomethodology is indifferent to structure at any level. Instead, ethnomethodology transcends the terms of the debate with a focus on empirical social practices whereby both microstructure and macrostructure are produced by and for the membership. This is also true of conversation analysis. Modifying Collins's "interaction ritual chains" to include this indifference to structure expands ethnomethodological understanding as well as Collins's theory.
Notes
