PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 1, 1990American Sociological Review158 citations

Ethnomethodology and the Micro-Macro Order

View Full Paper
RHRichard A. HilbertGustavus Adolphus College

Key Points

  • This work aims to clarify ethnomethodology's position in the micro-macro debate, emphasizing its indifference to structural levels.
  • Analyzes the micro-macro debate in sociology, specifically focusing on ethnomethodology and conversation analysis.
  • Modifies Collins's interaction ritual chains framework to encompass ethnomethodological perspectives.
  • Demonstrates that ethnomethodology effectively addresses both microstructure and macrostructure through empirical social practices.
  • Expands the theoretical understanding of Collins's interaction ritual chains by incorporating ethnomethodological insights.

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.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Richard A. Hilbert (1990) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a10d1775e6663f9d2647b66https://doi.org/10.2307/2095746
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper