Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,624

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social Skill and the Theory of Fields

Open access
Fligstein, Neil·2001·Sociological Theory
DOI 10.1111/0735-2751.00132
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The problem of the relationship between actors and the social structures in which they are embedded is central to sociological theory. This paper suggests that the “new institutionalist” focus on fields, domains, or games provides an alternative view of how to think about this problem by focusing on the construction of local orders. This paper criticizes the conception of actors in both rational choice and sociological versions of these theories. A more sociological view of action, what is called “social skill,” is developed. The idea of social skill originates in symbolic interactionism and is defined as the ability to induce cooperation in others. This idea is elaborated to suggest how actors are important to the construction and reproduction of local orders. I show how its elements already inform existing work. Finally, I show how the idea can sensitize scholars to the role of actors in empirical work.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/0735-2751.00132

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 87 references

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. 10.1177/000312249906400507 · doi:10.1177/000312249906400507
  2. Bourdieu P., 1992, Invitation to a Reflexive Sociology
  3. Colignon R., 1997, Power Plays
  4. DiMaggio P., 1988, Institutional Patterns and Organization, 3
  5. Geertz C., 1983, . Local Knowledge
  6. Goffman E., 1963, Stigma
  7. Goffman E., 1974, Frame Analysis
  8. Hays S., 1994, Sociological Theory, 8, 124
  9. Humphrey N., 1993, The History of the Mind
  10. Kingdon J., 1984, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy
  11. Laumann E., 1987, The Organizational State.
  12. 10.1007/978-1-349-02248-9 · DOI
  13. March J., 1989, Rediscovering Institutions
  14. Mead G. H., 1934, Mind, Self, and Society
  15. Meyer J., 1983, Organizational Environments
  16. Meyer J., 1981, Organization and the Human Services
  17. 10.7208/chicago/9780226185941.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Scott W. R., 1983, Organizational Environments, 129
  19. 10.2307/j.ctv11sn152 · doi:10.2307/j.ctv11sn152
  20. Silber I., 1995, Social Research, 62, 323
  21. Tsebelis G., 1990, Nested Games
  22. Weber M., 1978, Economy and Society

Cited by

See all 1,624

Metadata

Authors
Fligstein, N.
Venue
Sociological Theory
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2001-07
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
105-125
ISSN
  • 0735-2751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9558
DOI
10.1111/0735-2751.00132
OpenAlex
W2146629399
Cited by
1,624
References
87
FWCI
31.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social Skill and the Theory of Fields. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/0735-2751.00132
The paper
Fligstein, N. (2001). Social Skill and the Theory of Fields. Sociological Theory. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00132

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.