Published November 17, 2021
| Version v1
Journal article
Open
CRITICAL REVIEW OF J. CHAN'S MODEL OF SOCIAL COHESION MEASUREMENT: PERSPECTIVES OF ADAPTATION TO THE UKRAINIAN CONTEXT
Description
The article is devoted to identifying the “weaknesses” of J. Chan's model of social cohesion theoretical conceptualization and empirical measurement and outlining promising areas for its adaptation to the Ukrainian context. It's summarized the necessity of refining the definition of social cohesion from the standpoint of social dynamics, supplementing the subjective component of the model with “value” indicators, diversification with projective issues in order to avoid the “spiral of silence” and Lapierre's paradox.
Files
Deineko O. O.-192-207.pdf
Files
(307.3 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:2d56b621d27cfdc4553484c80eae070a
|
307.3 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
References
- 1. Berezovska-Chmil, O.B., Chernyshova, T.O., Kuchyn, S.P., et al. (2021). Spetsyfika rozvytku suchasnoho sotsialno-humanitarnoho seredovyshcha: kol. monohr. Kharkiv: SH NTM «Novyi kurs» [in Ukrainian].
- 2. Panfilov, O.Yu. (Ed.) (2019). Sotsialno-humanitarna sfera Ukrainy v suchasnykh dyskursakh: monohrafiia. Kharkiv: KhIF KNTEU, vydavets O.A. Miroshnychenko [in Ukrainian].
- 3. Friedkin, N.E. (2004). Social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 409-425. DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV.SOC.30.012703.110625
- 4. Andrews, R., Jilke, S., & Van de Walle, S. (2014). Economic strain and perceptions of social cohesion in Europe: Does institutional trust matter? European Journal of Political Research, 53(3), 559–579. DOI: 10.1111/1475-6765.12052
- 5. Chan, J., To, H.-P., & Chan E. (2006). Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research. Social indicators research, 75(2), 273-302.
- 6. Dyurkgeym, E. (1991). O razdelenii obschestvennogo truda. Metod sotsiologii. Moskva: Nauka [in Russian].
- 7. Dembitskyi, S.S., & Liubyva, T.Ia. (2017). Vymohy do rozrobky ta adaptatsii kompleksnykh vymiriuvalnykh instrumentiv u sotsiolohii: nadiinist, validnist i dostovirnist. Ukrainskyi sotsium – Ukrainian society, 3(62), 45–57 [in Ukrainian].
- 8. Dickes, P., & Valentova, M. (2013). Construction, validation and application of the measurement of social cohesion in 47 European countries and regions. Social Indicators Research, 113(3), 827-846.
- 9. Bondarenko, M., Babenko, S., & Borovskyi, O. (2017). Sotsialna zghurtovanist v Ukraini (dosvid aplikatsii metodyky Bertelsmann Stiftung do danykh Yevropeiskoho sotsialnoho doslidzhennia). Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka - Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University, 8, 58-65 [in Ukrainian].
- 10. Indeks sotsialnoi zghurtovanosti i prymyrennia OON dlia skhidnoi Ukrainy. Retrieved from https://scoreforpeace.org/files/publication/pub_file/13/SocialConnectednessAndBelonging_UKR.pdf [in Ukrainian].
- 11. Jenson, J. (1998). Mapping social cohesion: The state of Canadian research. Ottawa: Canadian policy research networks. 1998. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/26949106/Mapping_Social_Cohesion_The_State_of_Canadian_Research
- 12. Jenson, J. (2011). Defining and measuring social cohesion. London: Commonwealth Secretariat: UNRISD. Nov.
- 13. Bernard, P. (1999). La cohésion sociale : critique dialectique d'un quasi-concept. Lien social et Politiques, 41, 47-59.
- 14. Berger-Schmitt, R. (2002). Considering social cohesion in quality of life assessments: Concept and measurement. Social Indicators Research, 58, 403–428.
- 15. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- 16. Protsenko, O. O. (2018). Obraz vnutrishno peremishchenykh osib v mediinomu dyskursi : krytychnyi dyskurs-analiz povidomlen ZMI. Visnyk Odeskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Sotsiolohiia i politychni nauky – Bulletin of the Odessa National university. Sociology and political science, 23(1(30)), 122–130 [in Ukrainian].
- 17. Filippova. O. A.. & Soroka. Yu. G. (2009). Politiki identichnosti: antropologicheskiye metody i sotsiokulturnyye interpretatsii. Metodolohiia, teoriia ta praktyka sotsiolohichnoho analizusuchasnoho suspilstva : zbirnyk naukovykh prats – Methodology, theory and practice of sociological analysis of contemporary society: a collection of scientific papers, 15, 129–135. Kharkiv: V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University [in Russian].
- 18. Ritzer, J. (2002). Sovremennye sociologicheskie teorii. St. Peterburg: Peter [in Russian].
- 19. Sereda, V. (2014). Pereosmysliuiuchy ukrainskyi identyfikatsiinyi prostir: hromadskyi aktyvizm v Ukraini pislia Yevromaidanu. Holovakha, Ye.I., & Stehnii, O.H. (Eds.). Fenomen Maidanu v ukrainskomu suspilstvi: sotsiolohichni interpretatsii, pp. 58-78. Kyiv: Instytut sotsiolohii NAN. Ukrainy [in Ukrainian].
- 20. Deineko, O. O. (2020). Lokalnyi hromadskyi aktyvizm yak komponent sotsialnoi zghurtovanosti v obiednanykh hromadakh: osoblyvosti, proiavy, ahenty. Aktualni problemy filosofii ta sotsiolohii – Current issues of philosophy and sociology, 26, 51-52 [in Ukrainian].
- 21. Vasyliev, H. Yu., Vodnik, V. D., Volianska, O. V., et al. (2013). Hromadianske suspilstvo: politychni ta sotsialno-pravovi problemy rozvytku : monohrafiia / Trebin, M.P. (ed.). Kharkiv: Pravo [in Ukrainian].
- 22. Bezruk, O. O., Blikhar, V. S., Herasina, L. M., et al. (2019). Polityko-pravova mentalnist ukrainskoho sotsiumu v umovakh yevropeiskoi intehratsii : monohrafiia / Trebin, M.P. (ed.). Kharkiv : Pravo [in Ukrainian].
- 23. Gofman, A. B. (2015). Kontseptualnyie podhodyi k analizu sotsialnogo edinstva. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya – Sociological research, 11, 29-36 [in Russian].
- 24. Yarskaya-Smirnova, E. R., Yarskaya, V. N. (2014). Sotsialnaya splochennost: napravleniya teoreticheskoy diskussii i perspektivyi sotsialnoy politiki. Zhurnal sociologii i social'noj antropologii Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 17(4), 41-61. Retrieved from http://www.jourssa.ru/sites/all/files/volumes/2014_4/Iarskaya_Yarskaya_2014_4.pdf [in Russian].
- 25. Krotiuk, V.A. (Ed.) (2021). Viiny informatsiinoi epokhy: mizhdystsyplinarnyi dyskurs: monohrafiia. Kharkiv: FOP Fedorko M. Yu. [in Ukrainian].