The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology: Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States
Abstract
This book provides a powerful theoretical framework for understanding cross-national cultural differences. Focusing on France and America, it analyses how the people of these two different cultures mobilise national 'repertoires of evaluation' to make judgements about politics, economics, morals and aesthetics. The analysis draws on eight case studies by eleven French and American researchers who have worked together over a number of years to develop systematic comparisons between these countries. The topics are wide-ranging, comparing how individuals use the cultural tools at their disposal to answer questions such as: are races equal? What constitutes sexual harassment? What is the value of contemporary art? Should journalists be neutral? How can the defense of the environment be reconciled with economic imperatives? Moving beyond simplistic essentialist models of national character, this comparative approach offers important insights that will interest not only sociologists but also political scientists and anthropologists.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation
Lamont, M. (2012) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120022 · Cited by 1,492
The Economic Sociology of Conventions: Habit, Custom, Practice, and Routine in Market Order
Biggart, N. W., & Beamish, T. D. (2003) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.29.010202.100051 · Cited by 345
Fancourt, D., & Steptoe, A. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l6377 · Cited by 125
Which Road to Follow? The Moral Complexity of an “Equipped” Humanity
Thevenot, L. (2002) · Complexities · doi:10.1215/9780822383550-003 · Cited by 90
Reconfiguring the Deserving Refugee: Cultural Categories of Worth and the Making of Refugee Policy
Shiff, T. (2020) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.1111/lasr.12456 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2000-12-11
- OpenAlex
- W5387865
- Cited by
- 680
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.52
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.