PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 5, 2026Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour3 citationsOpen Access

Norm Circles and Critical Realism

View Full Paper
DEDave Elder‐VassMHManuel Heckel

Key Points

  • This paper aims to clarify the relationships between norm circle theory and critical realist theorists.
  • Analyzes the concept of norm circles in relation to critical realist theorists Roy Bhaskar, Margaret Archer, and Tony Lawson.
  • Examines how norm circles possess emergent causal powers.
  • Discusses the morphogenetic approach and its relation to the development of norm circles.
  • Explores tensions between norm circles and Archer's concepts of reflexivity and culture.
  • Relates norm circles to social positioning theory as explained by Lawson.
  • Norm circles are described as emerging entities that influence social conformity and normativity.
  • The morphogenetic approach provides insights into the formation and evolution of norm circles.
  • Tensions exist between norm circle theory and existing theories of reflexivity and culture.
  • Norm circles enhance the understanding of social positioning and obligations as central aspects of social structures.

Abstract

ABSTRACT An increasing number of scholars have employed the critical realist concept of norm circles in empirical research. Norm circles are social structures, composed of human agents, that tend to encourage people to conform with norms. As such, they provide a (partly) structural explanation for social normativity, which in turn plays an important role in many other social structures. Researchers who come across the concept, however, often ask how it relates to other elements of critical realist theory. This paper addresses the relationships between norm circle theory and the work of three influential critical realist theorists: Roy Bhaskar, Margaret Archer and Tony Lawson. With reference to Bhaskar's work, it presents norm circles as entities with emergent causal powers and as social structures that are concept and activity dependent. With reference to Archer's work, it shows how the morphogenetic approach applies to the development of norm circles but also considers the tensions between norm circle theory and Archer's understandings of reflexivity and culture. Regarding Lawson's work, it argues that norm circles add an explanation of why people go along with positional rights and obligations that are the centrepiece of Social Positioning Theory and how positions exist. Overall, the paper argues that norm circle theory complements all these contributions. It illustrates how abstract ontological work can be applied to more concrete empirical social cases and thus extends critical realist social ontology. Given the centrality of normativity to many social structures, it also provides a resource for theorising other forms of social structure.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Elder‐Vass et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d1fdd4a79560c99a0a40f8https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.70038
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Doing Gender1987 · 8,800 citations
  2. 2Structure, Agency and the Internal Conversation2003 · 2,424 citations
  3. 3The Causal Power of Social Structures2010 · 714 citations
  4. 4The Influence of Peers on Children's Socialization to Gender Roles2000 · 92 citations
  5. 5The Nature of Post Keynesianism and Its Links to Other Traditions1994 · 18 citations