The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Changing Nature of Professional Control
Abstract
The traditional view of the professions is that they are largely free of the hierarchical forms of social control characteristic of other kinds of occupations; instead, they are self-regulating, subject only to informal collegial control. As a result of events in the past few decades in the United States, analysts now believe that the traditional autonomy of professions is eroding. This paper reviews two theories that emphasize this process, one focusing on deprofessionalization and the other on proletarianization. It concludes that the available evidence does not support either theory sufficiently to make them analytically useful; it advances an alternate theory that emphasizes the formalization of professional social control. This third viewpoint is based on the finding that the professions—as corporate bodies—have remained relatively autonomous. Antitrust decisions, political pressure to exercise more control over errant members, and the administrative requirement of greater accountability in large organizations employing professionals are all leading to a formalization of the methods by which professions control their members. An administrative elite of professionals who serve as supervisors, managers, chief executive officers, and owners is being formed in order to guide and evaluate the performance of rank and file professionals. The technical standards employed by such professionally qualified administrators are devised by a separate group of professionals—the knowledge elite—who are based primarily in professional schools. Rank and file practitioners are no longer as free to follow the dictates of their individual judgments as in the past, though quite unlike other workers, their work is expected to involve the use of discretion on a daily basis. Stratification in the professions, which has always existed, has become more formal and overt than in the past. This development may lead to divisions within any given profession as a whole that are too deep to contain within a nominally unified corporate body.
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
Cites
Bucher, R., & Strauss, A. (1961) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/222898 · Cited by 821
The Recent History of Professionalism in Relation to Social Structure and Social Policy
Marshall, T. H. (1939) · Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science · doi:10.2307/137036 · Cited by 224
Cited by
The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals
Mazmanian, M., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2013) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1120.0806 · Cited by 1,364
Institutional Work to Maintain Professional Power: Recreating the Model of Medical Professionalism
Currie, G., Lockett, A., Finn, R., Martin, G., & Waring, J. (2012) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840612445116 · Cited by 448
The organizational context of professionalism in accounting
Suddaby, R., Gendron, Y., & Lam, H. (2009) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2009.01.007 · Cited by 448
3. Paradigm shifts and the practice of participatory research and development
Chambers, R. (1995) · Power and Participatory Development · doi:10.3362/9781780445649.003 · Cited by 335
Clinical autonomy, individual and collective: the problem of changing doctors’ behaviour
Armstrong, D. (2002) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(01)00309-4 · Cited by 295
Metadata
- Authors
- Freidson, E.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Sociology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 1984-08
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-20
- ISSN
- 0360-0572 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2115
- OpenAlex
- W2141956709
- Cited by
- 523
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.75
- Type
- journal article
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Changing Nature of Professional Control. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.so.10.080184.000245
- The paper
- Freidson, E. (1984). The Changing Nature of Professional Control. Annual Review of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.10.080184.000245
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.