Annual Review of Sociology - Volume 41, 2015

The term intersectionality references the critical insight that race, class, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, nation, ability, and age operate not as unitary, mutually exclusive entities, but rather as reciprocally constructing phenomena. Despite this general consensus, definitions of what counts as intersectionality are far from clear. In this article, I analyze intersectionality as a knowledge project whose raison d'être lies in its attentiveness to power relations and social inequalities. I examine three interdependent sets of concerns: (a) intersectionality as a field of study that is situated within the power relations that it studies; (b) intersectionality as an analytical strategy that provides new angles of vision on social phenomena; and (c) intersectionality as critical praxis that informs social justice projects.

I discuss the concept of complexity and the burgeoning field of complex systems and their relevance to sociology. I begin by comparing and contrasting various definitions of complexity and then describe the attributes of systems capable of producing complexity: diversity, networked interactions, interdependent behavior, and adaptation. Next, I survey the contributions of complexity sciences with the most resonance with sociology. I organize those contributions into four categories: dynamics, aggregation, distributions, and functional properties of structure and diversity. On the basis of that survey, I conclude that incorporating complexity science into sociology requires the introduction of new models and methodologies as well as a more expansive approach to empirical research, and that the benefits of a deeper engagement with complexity will be substantial.

In explaining the sources of cooperation and prosocial behavior, psychologists, behavioral economists, and biologists often focus on factors internal to the individual, such as altruistic motivations, other-regarding preferences, and prosocial emotions. By contrast, sociologists typically emphasize social forces external to the individual, including norms, reputation systems, and social networks. Here we review evidence for these rules, reputations, and relations, showing that they have powerful and pervasive effects on cooperation and prosocial behavior. Our discussion highlights two emergent themes of the reviewed literature. First, although these classes of sociological mechanisms typically promote cooperation, their presence can also create ambiguity for individuals regarding the reasons for their own and others' prosocial acts, and that ambiguity can undermine future prosociality in subsequent settings where the mechanisms are absent. Second, altruistic preferences and social mechanisms often interact, such that the causal significance of altruism is attenuated where these mechanisms are present.

In this article, we discuss the increasing interdependence of societies, focusing specifically on issues of systemic instability and fragility generated by the new and unprecedented level of connectedness and complexity resulting from globalization. We define the global system as a set of tightly coupled interactions that allow for the continued flow of information, capital, goods, services, and people. Using the general concepts of globality, complexity, networks, and the nature of risk, we analyze case studies of trade, finance, infrastructure, climate change, and public health to develop empirical support for the concept of global systemic risk. We seek to identify and describe the sources and nature of such risks and methods of thinking about risks that may inform future academic research and policy-making decisions.

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, research on stigma has continued. Building on conceptual and empirical work, the recent period clarifies new types of stigmas, expansion of measures, identification of new directions, and increasingly complex levels. Standard beliefs have been challenged, the relationship between stigma research and public debates reconsidered, and new scientific foundations for policy and programs suggested. We begin with a summary of the most recent Annual Review articles on stigma, which reminded sociologists of conceptual tools, informed them of developments from academic neighbors, and claimed findings from the early period of “resurgence.” Continued (even accelerated) progress has also revealed a central problem. Terms and measures are often used interchangeably, leading to confusion and decreasing accumulated knowledge. Drawing from this work but focusing on the past 14 years of stigma research (including mental illness, sexual orientation, HIV/AIDS, and race/ethnicity), we provide a theoretical architecture of concepts (e.g., prejudice, experienced/received discrimination), drawn together through a stigma process (i.e., stigmatization), based on four theoretical premises. Many characteristics of the mark (e.g., discredited, concealable) and variants (i.e., stigma types and targets) become the focus of increasingly specific and multidimensional definitions. Drawing from complex and systems science, we propose a stigma complex, a system of interrelated, heterogeneous parts bringing together insights across disciplines to provide a more realistic and complicated sense of the challenge facing research and change efforts. The Framework Integrating Normative Influences on Stigma (FINIS) offers a multilevel approach that can be tailored to stigmatized statuses. Finally, we outline challenges for the next phase of stigma research, with the goal of continuing scientific activity that enhances our understanding of stigma and builds the scientific foundation for efforts to reduce intolerance.

This article examines the development of the sociology of consumption. It identifies three periods in its evolution: origins prior to the 1980s; the years between the 1980s and the mid-2000s under the influence of the cultural turn; and the subsequent decade, when new theoretical perspectives and political issues have emerged. Achievements of the second period are reviewed and three areas of fresh and productive recent research are identified: cultural consumption and its intersection with inequality and stratification, sustainable consumption and the organization of everyday life in Western societies, and the politics of consumption. The article concludes with a discussion of possibilities for future research.

The US prison boom has resulted in the mass incarceration of parents in the United States. We review recent scholarship on the relationship between parental incarceration and child inequality and social exclusion over the life course. We develop a multilevel social exclusion framework to stimulate future research on the effects of paternal and maternal incarceration. This framework is intergenerational in its focus on incarcerated parents and their children, interinstitutional in its attention to state and school regimes, and intersectional in its consideration of the role of gender and race and ethnic contingencies. It is also systemic in its focus on multiple chosen and overlapping institutional policy domains of exclusion. We address both mediators and moderators of the effects of parental incarceration on child outcomes. We emphasize the underresearched importance of meso-level (e.g., school) and macro-level (e.g., state and cross-national) exclusionary and inclusionary regimes in understanding the effects of parental incarceration. We propose hypotheses to synthesize current research on the impact of maternal and paternal incarceration on children.

Charter schools have been on the educational reform landscape for over twenty years. In the last ten years, a number of rigorous studies have examined the effects of these schools on student achievement and educational attainment. Findings reveal mixed results where student achievement is concerned (i.e., some positive, some negative, some neutral) and positive results in terms of educational attainment (i.e., high school graduation and college attendance). The article places this research within a framework that draws on both market and institutional theories, and concludes that additional research on the social organization of charter schools and traditional public schools is needed to better understand the conditions under which school choice is or is not effective.

The existing evidence linking recessions to individual and population health presents a puzzle. Some studies show that people who experience the kinds of labor market, housing, and asset shocks that proliferate in recessions suffer negative health consequences, whereas other studies show that mortality rates fall when the economy worsens. This review synthesizes evidence from these distinct research traditions in light of emerging findings from the Great Recession of 2007–2009. It traces pathways by which macroeconomic changes “get under the skin” and generate contradictory aggregate- and individual-level consequences. Research on the longer-term health effects of recessions could be strengthened by integrating theoretical and analytical approaches from sociology. These include a multilevel perspective that considers how individuals cope with recessions as members of families and communities embedded in different policy environments, and attention to cascades of recessionary shocks, individuals' strategies for coping with them, and the way these intersect with health trajectories.

Financialization refers to the increasing importance of finance, financial markets, and financial institutions to the workings of the economy. This article reviews evidence on the causes and consequences of financialization in the United States and around the world, with particular attention to the spread of financial markets. Researchers have focused on two broad themes at the level of corporations and broader societies. First, an orientation toward shareholder value has led to substantial changes in corporate strategies and structures that have encouraged outsourcing and corporate disaggregation while increasing compensation at the top. Second, financialization has shaped patterns of inequality, culture, and social change in the broader society. Underlying these changes is a broad shift in how capital is intermediated, from financial institutions to financial markets, through mechanisms such as securitization (turning debts into marketable securities). Enabled by a combination of theory, technology, and ideology, financialization is a potent force for changing social institutions.

The article begins with a discussion of definitional issues regarding human trafficking and modern slavery and then briefly critiques some popular claims regarding each problem. Examples of macro-level research are critically evaluated, followed by a review of micro-level studies that illustrate tremendous variation and complexity in structural arrangements and individuals' lived experiences. These studies suggest that in this field micro-level research has at least three advantages over grand, macro-level meta-analyses—advantages that are quantitative (i.e., estimating the magnitude of the problem within a measurable universe), qualitative (i.e., documenting complexities in lived experiences), and well suited to formulating contextually appropriate policy and enforcement responses.

At the close of World War II, “development” began to evolve along two paths. On the first path, scholars aimed to generate theoretical understandings of social change, especially at the national level (development studies). On the second path, policy makers in governments and other development-focused organizations initiated actions to promote positive social change, especially in poor or war-torn nations (development practice). In this article, we review the recent trajectory of “development” in sociology, paying close attention to the intersections between development studies and development practice. Through explicit comparisons to economics and political science, we demonstrate how the prominence of development sociology has varied historically in relation to its proposed policy prescriptions. We conclude by highlighting five uniquely sociological contributions that could powerfully improve contemporary interdisciplinary development conversations, and by calling for greater sociological attention to the complex ways in which a growing transnational field of development practitioners is shaping a multiplicity of development outcomes.

Health and health care have played important roles during the rise of empire and during its subsequent decline. Research has emphasized the underdevelopment of health in less developed countries, the opening of new markets for medical products manufactured in dominant nations, the contribution of public health in enhancing the productivity of labor, the impact of medicine in reinforcing international class relations, and the adverse effects of military interventions on health and mental health. Latin American social medicine, especially work by Salvador Allende, has clarified the social origins of illness and early death in the context of empire. Connections among empire, health, and health care have operated through key mediating institutions: trade agreements and international financial institutions, foundations, and international public health organizations. Several popular struggles show a diminishing tolerance among the world's peoples for the health policies of empire and a growing demand for health systems grounded in solidarity rather than profitability.

The expansion of the penal system has been one of the most dramatic trends in contemporary American society. A wealth of research has examined the impact of incarceration on a range of later life outcomes and has considered how the penal system has emerged as a mechanism of stratification and inequality in the United States. In this article, we review the literature from a comparatively new vein of this research: the impact of incarceration on health outcomes. We first consider the impact of incarceration on a range of individual outcomes, from chronic health conditions to mortality. We then consider outcomes beyond the individual, including the health of family members and community health outcomes. Next, we discuss mechanisms linking incarceration and health outcomes before closing with a consideration of limitations in the field and directions for future research.

We previously proposed that socioeconomic status (SES) is a fundamental cause of health inequalities and, as such, that SES inequalities in health persist over time despite radical changes in the diseases, risks, and interventions that happen to produce them at any given time. Like SES, race in the United States has an enduring connection to health and mortality. Our goals here are to evaluate whether this connection endures because systemic racism is a fundamental cause of health inequalities and, in doing so, to review a wide range of empirical data regarding racial differences in health outcomes, health risks, and health-enhancing resources such as money, knowledge, power, prestige, freedom, and beneficial social connections. We conclude that racial inequalities in health endure primarily because racism is a fundamental cause of racial differences in SES and because SES is a fundamental cause of health inequalities. In addition to these powerful connections, however, there is evidence that racism, largely via inequalities in power, prestige, freedom, neighborhood context, and health care, also has a fundamental association with health independent of SES.

Improving science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, especially for traditionally disadvantaged groups, is widely recognized as pivotal to the United States's long-term economic growth and security. In this article, we review and discuss current research on STEM education in the United States, drawing on recent research in sociology and related fields. The reviewed literature shows that different social factors affect the two major components of STEM education attainment: (a) attainment of education in general, and (b) attainment of STEM education relative to non-STEM education conditional on educational attainment. Cognitive and social-psychological characteristics matter for both components, as do structural influences at the family, neighborhood, school, and broader cultural levels. However, whereas commonly used measures of socioeconomic status (SES) predict the attainment of general education, social-psychological factors are more important influences on participation and achievement in STEM versus non-STEM education. Domestically, disparities by family SES, race, and gender persist in STEM education. Internationally, American students lag behind those in some countries with fewer economic resources. Explanations for group disparities within the United States and the mediocre international ranking of US student performance require more research, a task that is best accomplished through interdisciplinary approaches.

Job loss is an involuntary disruptive life event with a far-reaching impact on workers' life trajectories. Its incidence among growing segments of the workforce, alongside the recent era of severe economic upheaval, has increased attention to the effects of job loss and unemployment. As a relatively exogenous labor market shock, the study of displacement enables robust estimates of associations between socioeconomic circumstances and life outcomes. Research suggests that displacement is associated with subsequent unemployment, long-term earnings losses, and lower job quality; declines in psychological and physical well-being; loss of psychosocial assets; social withdrawal; family disruption; and lower levels of children's attainment and well-being. Although reemployment mitigates some of the negative effects of job loss, it does not eliminate them. Contexts of widespread unemployment, although associated with larger economic losses, lessen the social-psychological impact of job loss. Future research should attend more fully to how the economic and social-psychological effects of displacement intersect and extend beyond displaced workers themselves.

Research on the environmental dimensions of human migration has made important strides in recent years. However, findings have been spread across multiple disciplines with wide-ranging methodologies and limited theoretical development. This article reviews key findings of the field and identifies future directions for sociological research. We contend that the field has moved beyond linear environmental “push” theories toward a greater integration of context, including micro-level, meso-level, and macro-level interactions. We highlight findings that migration is often a household strategy to diversify risk (new economics of labor migration theory), interacting with household composition; individual characteristics; social networks; and historical, political, and economic contexts. We highlight promising developments in the field, including the recognition that migration is a long-standing form of environmental adaptation and yet only one among many forms of adaptation. Finally, we argue that sociologists could contribute significantly to migration–environment inquiry through attention to issues of inequality, perceptions, and agency vis-à-vis structure.

This article contributes to the global dialogue attempting to incorporate South-South intraregional migration into policy and academic discussions by reviewing the dynamics, characteristics, and legal contexts of interregional migration in South America. We first present the historical formation of migratory subsystems and identify emerging trends. We then organize our revision along the main theoretical issues surrounding international migration and their significance in the region. These issues include motivation, contexts of origin and reception, migration dynamics, gender, race and ethnicity, immigrant adaptation, and migration policies. Next, we consider the study of South American migrations, both internal and international, to be a research agenda with significant potential to deepen our understanding of migrations in general and to propose new theoretical orientations that go beyond the questions already identified in the mobility from poorer to wealthier countries. We conclude with suggestions for a research agenda devoted to interregional migration in South America.

Every human being in every society results from reproduction, and most American men and women will have a child at some point in their lives. Even those who do not want to have children must contend with strong cultural presumptions around parenthood and, if they are sexually active, take steps to ensure they do not reproduce. In this review I discuss recent research on pregnancy, birth, abortion, contraception, infertility, and assisted reproduction. I argue that social scientists have conceptualized reproduction as a series of events that occur primarily in women's bodies. To stimulate theoretical and empirical research in this area, I develop a new conceptualization of reproduction as a biological and social process. I conclude by pointing to areas in need of further research, including reproductive aging, men, and the integration of qualitative and quantitative research.