The Role of Theories within Sport Sociology

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to outline several levels of theoretical abstraction in sociology and to apply these to the subfield of sport sociology. Specifically, the levels of abstraction discussed include grand theory, paradigms, theories of middlerange, and empirical generalizations. The focus of the paper is on Merton's theories of middle-range as the level of abstraction that holds the most promise for the accumulation of knowledge in sociology of sport. Several research traditions in sport sociology are examined that demonstrate a middle-range level of theoretical abstraction.There have been two persistent and related' controversies within the fledgling subfield of sport sociology: (1) the debate over normative versus value-free approaches to the subject matter, and (2) dissensus concerning theoretical perspectives and their related methodologies. These conflict are often interrelated since the normative or nonnormative posture that one assumes may also be associated with a particular theoretical perspective. For example. the normative orientation is often associated with applied research orientation, and a Marxian perspective is commonly used by analysts attempting to bring about changes in individuals or society. An applied researcher might focus on trying to improve individuals' physical fitness, skill development, and performances, while a Marxist might take a critical stance toward racism or exploitation in sport with the hope of promoting more humane sport programs. Cutting across these two areas of dissensus are liberal (or perhaps even radical) and conservative viewpoints. Thus in the examples cited above, the reformist researcher would assume a radical stance while the applied researcher is interested in improving performances within the present sport context and is not attempting to bring about basic changes in the social institution of sport or the society.Although these controversies reflect competing orientations within social science, their implications for sport sociology have been explicated by several writers (Melnick, 1975; Gruneau, 1976: 8-43;Loy, McPherson, and Kenyon, 1978; Sage, 1979: 23-31). In fact, the hybrid nature of sport t sociology serves to exaggerate these contrasts. Thus, the physical educator at LAKEHEAD UNIV on April 6, 2015 irs.sagepub.com Downloaded from 6 who is teaching and researching in the subfield of sport sociology would be expected to display an applied and normative orientation. In this context Loy et al. (1978: 46) have noted that &dquo;Many of these studies (by physical educators) are not based on sociological theories which can provide a sound rationale for the study, nor do they reflect an awareness or , understanding of the basic sociological concepts related to social processes, structures or systems.&dquo; Conversely, sociologists studying sport may be physical educators as too theoretical who primarily conduct pure research regarding the world of sport. In summary, within sport sociology there are two basic controversies: normative and nonnormative ori...