No abstract

Earlier treatments of moderatum generalization (e.g. Williams, 2000a) explicitly addressed interpretivist sociology. This article extends that earlier argument by examining some of its implications for a wider range of qualitative research methods. It first adopts an empirical approach, providing concrete illustrations from the most recent volume of Sociology of what sociologists actually do when describing the meaning of their findings. In the light of this, we reconsider the significance of moderatum generalization for research practice and the status of sociological knowledge, in particular making the case that research design should plan for anticipated generalizations, and that generalization should be more explicitly formulated within a context of supporting evidence.

The dominant position on research methodology and methods among British sociologists has for many years been that of 'methodological pluralism'. However, concerns have lately been expressed about the lack of research involving quantitative methods, not least by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). A study of the four mainstream British journals over two years, together with associated sources, demonstrates national patterns of research methods used in published work, the topics tackled and variations between authors in the methods chosen. The findings suggest empirical support for the concerns recently expressed by the ESRC, and an argument, not for less qualitative research, but for more quantitative research. KEY WORDSdocumentary analysis / ESRC / methodological pluralism / quantitative methods 153 Sociology

Sociological understanding of social mobility in Britain has depended heavily on the 1972 Nuffield Mobility Study. In the virtual absence of more recent data, analysis has drawn on this single study with its reliance on cohorts of males as the indicator of changes in mobility. One of the central conclusions has been that relative mobility rates, the key marker of class inequalities, remain unchanged. A new analysis of data from recent British Election Surveys shows that these conclusions should not be empirically generalised to the last quarter of a century, and that British society has experienced both periods of greater ?openness? and ‘closure’. Several conceptual reservations follow once the limitations of the ‘Nuffield tradition’ have been identified. In particular, a case is made for closer attention to labour market processes and rates of absolute mobility.

Housing research has yet to achieve an adequate framework to guide research into the effects of social policy. Two concepts are outlined and used in this article to analyse one local housing market; it is hoped that these will prove generally useful. The concepts are ‘housing status group’ (a modification of Rex and Moore's ‘housing classes’ model), and ‘housing pathway’, which refers to the structure of housing careers. In a low-cost study of a large sample of child-bearing families in Aberdeen, the relationship between housing tenure and occupational class, family size, and experience of housing deprivation is explored. Five principles of the local housing market's operation are abstracted by use of the status group approach, and three main housing pathways are identified. Data are presented which show that the chance of encountering bad housing conditions is strongly correlated with tenure, and that in turn, access to types of tenure is strictly rule-restricted. The local housing market appears to be rigidly stratified, with housing status groups re-inforcing other patterned social conditions, and housing pathways which are sharply differentiated. Because of this, the authors argue for a ‘constraint’ model of family housing experience which can be integrated into a general sociological theory of structured social inequality.