Structural changes and association in mobility tables: an integration and extension of existing approaches

Previous work distinguishing the effects of structural change from stratification processes on mobility chances include the mobility ratio, the standard log-linear model for mobility tables, and the models proposed by Hope, and by Sobel, Hout and Duncan. Each approach is in some respect problematic. Adapting ideas from each approach, we present a model for mobility tables that distinguishes structural effects unambiguously from stratification processes. Our model incorporates a base of structural constancy and no association, together with stable structural effects unaffected by the particular pattern of association, as well as estimates of the association affecting each cell. An important feature of the model is that it can provide estimates of the direct effects of stratification processes and their consequences.

[1]  J. Goldthorpe,et al.  The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies , 1993 .

[2]  K. S. Banerjee.  Generalized Inverse of Matrices and Its Applications , 1973 .

[3]  J. Goldthorpe,et al.  Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain , 1980 .

[4]  K. Hope.  Vertical Mobility in Britain: A Structured Analysis , 1981 .

[5]  M. Mcclendon.  Structural and Exchange Components of Occupational Mobility: A Cross‐National Analysis* , 1980 .

[6]  Robert M. Hauser,et al.  A Structural Model of the Mobility Table , 1978 .

[7]  D. Treiman,et al.  Intergenerational class mobility in comparative perspective , 1989 .

[8]  O. D. Duncan.  How Destination Depends on Origin in the Occupational Mobility Table , 1979, American Journal of Sociology.

[9]  Michael E. Sobel,et al.  Exchange, Structure, and Symmetry in Occupational Mobility , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[10]  A. Guest,et al.  Generation, Ethnicity, and Occupational Opportunity in Late 19th Century America. , 1990 .

[11]  Keith Hope.  The New Mobility Ratio , 1981 .

[12]  K. Hope.  Vertical and Nonvertical Class Mobility in Three Countries , 1982 .

[13]  Michael E. Sobel,et al.  Structural Mobility, Circulation Mobility and the Analysis of Occupational Mobility: A Conceptual Mismatch , 1983 .

[14]  Saburo Yasuda,et al.  A methodological inquiry into social mobllity , 1964 .

[15]  R. Breen.  A Framework for Comparative Analyses of Social Mobility , 1985 .

[16]  K. Macdonald.  On the interpretation of a structural model of the mobility table , 1983 .

[17]  F. Jones.  Structural and Circulation Mobility are Alive and Well: A Critical Comment on Sobel's Premature Obituary Notice , 1985 .

[18]  Hope for the Mobility Ratio , 1981 .

[19]  A. Tyree,et al.  Mobility ratios and association in mobility tables. , 1973, Population studies.

[20]  M. Hout,et al.  Following in Father's Footstep: Social Mobility in Ireland. , 1989 .

[21]  O. D. Duncan,et al.  The American Occupational Structure , 1967 .

[22]  Seppo Pöntinen,et al.  Models and social mobility research: a comparison of some log—linear models of a social mobility matrix , 1982 .

[23]  Gary D. Sandefur,et al.  Opportunity and Change. , 1978 .