People's Accounts Count: The Sociology of Accounts
Abstract
Humans are inexorably driven to search for order and meaning in their own and others' lives; accounts are a major avenue for sociologists to depict and understand the ways in which individuals experience and identify with that meaning and their social world. The accounts concept has a solid foundation and history in early sociological analysis and research. The current work on accounts focuses on “story-like” interpretations or explanations and their functions and consequences to a social actor's life. The concept is useful for gaining insight into the human experience and arriving at meanings or culturally embedded normative explanations. This concept deserves greater explicit attention in sociology and is in need of further theoretical development and stimulation. I argue that sociologists should embrace the concept of accounts; the foundation is set for a resurgence of work on accounts in sociology.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The ostensive aspect of routines allows people to explain what they are doing and provides a sense of when it is appropriate to ask for an accounting.
“The ostensive aspect of routines allows us to explain what we are doing and provides a sense of when it is appropriate to ask for an accounting (Lyman and Scott, 1968; Orbuch, 1997).”
From Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change (2003) · cites this paper as Orbuch, 1997
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 102 · Cited by 504
- Authors
- Orbuch, T. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Orbuch, Terri L.
- ORCID
- Orbuch, Terri L.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Sociology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 1997-08
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 455-478
- ISSN
- 0360-0572 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2115
- OpenAlex
- W2114151784
- Cited by
- 504
- References
- 102
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 30
- FWCI
- 13.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annual Review of Sociology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative research in health
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Representations and Identity
- Keywords
- accounts, sociological theory, meaning-making, narrative explanation, social identity, normative explanation, human experience, history of sociology, theory development
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
