Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

Macrosociology addresses large-scale phenomena such as institutional systems, whereas microsociology deals with smaller-scale phenomena such as interpersonal behavior. Over the years, the theoretical agendas of macrosociology and microsociology have developed almost independently of one another. For some time, the issue of how to link these disparate levels of analysis – or how to close what is often termed the “micro-macro gap” – has been debated within theoretical sociology. Empirically, it is relatively easy to link micro and macro levels. For example, a researcher may observe that individual political opinions and voting behavior are affected by social class membership, thus indicating an empirical linkage between micro variables (opinions and voting behavior) and a macro variable (social class). In most attempts to develop theories that link micro to macro (or macro to micro), however, conceptual gaps appear in the exposition. These gaps typically involve an inability to specify conceptually the processes by which micro- and macro-level forces influence each other. For example, Max Weber's (1958 [1905]) famous analysis of how the psychological motivations of Protestants at “the level of meaning” led to the inception of capitalism is vague on the exact processes by which individual-level motivations generate societal-level outcomes. Similarly, it is often implicit in macro theories ... log in or subscribe to read full text