The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing

The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) provides a multidisciplinary examination of England’s ageing population by exploring factors ranging from income and social inequalities to physical and mental health. Running for over 20 years, the study integrates biological, genetic, medical, and social data from more than 19,000 participants and is particularly insightful for social policy decisions. Compelling findings show links between inequality and aging rate, and a noticeable rise in social isolation.

The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) is a scientific examination of how the population of England is ageing from a multidisciplinary perspective.

ELSA explores how a number of factors such as income, wealth, social inequalities, past life experiences, work, spending patterns, physical and mental health and well being are all related through the ageing process.

The study has been going for over 20 years now and the data helps understand the determinants of healthy ageing over a long period of time. It has also contributed to social policy decisions around pensions and social care. 

ELSA started in 2000 with a sample of 10 000 people and their partners, to date there have been over 19 000 participants. It is a a cohort study with the same people being interviewed every two years, 

The study collects a range of biological, genetic, medical, physiological, psychological and social data.

This is an excellent example of a very long standing longitudinal study.

Key questions asked of respondents include: 

  • Basic demographic data
  • Work, income, benefits, savings
  • Health mental and physical 
  • Social and civic engagement 
  • Spending patterns
  • Also end of life with relatives of the deceased. 

Some years involve more in-depth questions and cognitive tests. Every four years a nurse visits to collect blood samples and measures other  health indicators. 

Respondents have recently been interviewed in more depth about their retrospective life histories. Participants have also granted access to their financial and health records.

ELSA: Main aims  

To examine the ways in which different aspects of life are linked: 

  • What is the relationship between financial security and health? 
  • Why does the health of those in lower social positions decline faster? 
  • How have changes in pension arrangements affected decisions about retirement? 
  • How do social relationships change with age, and affect health and wellbeing? 
  • How does declining cognitive function affect the ability to plan a financial future?

ELSA has been designed to be compatible with the US Health and Retirement Study (HRS) so direct comparisons can be made. There are 15 similar studies in other countries, meaning broader cross national comparisons can also be made. 

Data from ELSA has been used to model pensions, welfare and disability policies. It has also been used to contribute to policies to get older people back to work and to develop national strategies for loneliness.

ESLA: Selected Findings and contributions 

The report breaks down the main findings into several different areas, below are just a few selected key points:

Inequality drives every aspect of ageing…

  • Greater wealth was linked to slower decline on all health measures used: for example the reduction in walking speed was 38 per cent greater in the lowest quarter of the wealth range than in the highest.
  • People from deprived neighbourhoods more likely to feel socially isolated.
  • Lack of education earlier on life means worse memory deterioration in later life. 

Inadequate health and social care 

The research revealed a large gap between the care that is recommended and care which is actually received, particularly for conditions most strongly associated with growing older….

bar chart showing lack of social care in the UK

Increasing social isolation 

The participants, all aged 52 and older, were asked in 2004 if they had a partner, how often they saw friends and family and whether they were members of clubs, organisations, committees or religious groups. They were also asked if they sometimes felt they lacked company. Around one in five were socially isolated or felt lonely, or both. 

The study followed those people up in 2012 to see how many had died.

 Other social factors that could lead to isolation were taken into account – a lack of social networks was known to be more common among people who were poorer, who had health problems or who had only basic education. In the most isolated fifth of the group around one in five had died, compared with one in eight in the least isolated.

Those who are isolated or lonely die sooner – but a range of background issues such as poverty, poor health and lack of education are a key part of the picture and are linked to mortality.

In England and Wales the proportion of 45- 64 year-olds living alone rose by 53 per cent between 1996 and 2012.

However a counter trend to this is caused by rising housing costs. There has been an 8.5% increase in adult children living with 50-64 year olds. 

Work and Pensions 

Objective measures of poor health only explains 15% of the decline in work for those aged 50-70. 

Among those aged 60-64 in 2013/14 around a quarter of men and almost four in ten women are well enough to work but are not working.

Those in better health are significantly more likely to carry on working, along with married men and highly educated women.

Among those who had full-time jobs, the hours worked were dropping. The change took place across the social spectrum and affected the full age range as well as those in different types of job

When planning for pensions, men underestimate their life expectancy by 10 years and women by nine years. 

ELSA and Social Changes

In 2000, average life expectancy for men in the UK was 75 and for women 80. 

What we learned in the last 20 years maybe something different to what we learn in the next 20 years!

In the first decade of the 21st Century life expectancy increased: the over-50s now constitute 40 per cent of the British population and by 2050 three in 10 will be over 60. And though there are signs the increase may have stalled, there is much that is positive to say.

By 2010 the figures had risen to 79 and 83, though no further increase occurred between then and 2020.But the health and social care needs of older people have grown, too.

We have learned a lot from the last 20 years of ELSA, but already what we have learned may not be relevant going forwards! Times are a changing!

Signposting

This material is directly relevant to the families and households module, part of A-level sociology.

Radical Criminology, aka New or Critical Criminology

Emerging in the late 1960s and 70s, Radical Criminology, aka New Criminology combined Marxist and Interactionist approaches, emphasizing capitalism’s role in producing crime, and the subsequent societal reactions. It called for understanding crime through several factors such as wealth distribution and societal response to deviance. Critics argue it offers no practical solution to crime and romanticizes criminals, while ignoring crime victimization of women.

Radical, new or critical criminologies of the late 1960s and 1970s had their basis in Marxism, Libertarianism, anarchism or American populism. 

They sought to understand crime control by referring to power, politics and inequalities and emphasised the need for political activism or praxis. 

Chambliss (1976, Box 1983) saw crime control as an oppressive and mystifying force. Legislation and law enforcement and ideological stereotyping preserved unequal class relations. 

The radical political economy of crime sought to expose the hegemonic ideologies that masked the real nature of crime and repression in capitalist societies. 

Most mundane offending was less harmful than exploitation, alienation, racism and pollution. 

Much proletarian crime could be redefined as a form of rebellion or redistributive class justice. Or the possessive individualism endemic to capitalist society. 

Criminal justice itself created visible crowds of working-class black scapegoats to deflect attention away from a capitalist system in terminal crisis. 

If the working classes did turn to crime they were themselves victims of false consciousness which inflated the nature of petit problems while hiding harms the bourgeoisie did. 

Black prisoners were the victims of race wars, prison the ultimate form of state repression. 

Most people were unaware of how power worked and it was the job of the radical criminologist to demystify. 

Socialism was the answer to the problem of crime.  

The New Criminology

In 1973 Taylor, Walton and Young published The New Criminology which combined Marxist and Interactionist approaches to crime.  They argued criminologists should examine all the different aspects surrounding why a crime takes place – the immediate and wider political reasons as well the societal reaction.   

They argued criminologists should examine how capitalism generates the circumstances of crime, the responses of the police, media, criminal justice system, offender and victim, and how all of these factors interact to influence how the situation develops. 

New Criminologists argued that criminals were lashing out against capitalism, in fact they say that they were mistakenly expressing their anger at capitalism through crime, rather than politics.  They also argued the media created moral panics and scapegoats about particular crimes to divert attention away from issues which may potentially be damaging to the ruling classes.

Book cover: the New Criminology
The New Criminology, published 1973.

The New Criminology was similar to Marxism….

  1. It accepted that the key to understanding crime is the material basis of society – the economy is the most important part.
  2. Believed that capitalist societies are unequal and these inequalities are the root of crime.
  3. Supported a radical change of society – theories of crime are useless unless they offer hope to liberate people from oppression. 

The New Criminology also criticised previous criminological theorising…

  • Marx was too economically deterministic. Taylor et al insist that criminals choose to break the law. External forces do not determine human behaviour.  
  • They dismissed most causal theories of crime and saw control, labelling, and biological theories as too determinist. They believed crimes were deliberate and conscious acts with political motives. 
  • Deviants were not just the passive victims of capitalism, they were engaged in active political struggle. 
  • They wanted socialism not communism. They envisaged a society where hippies, LGBTQ people, and maybe even drug users would be accepted and not turned into criminals. 

The Fully Social Theory of Deviance 

Taylor, Walton and Young developed the Fully Social Theory of Deviance to emphasise seven factors we need to look at to fully understand crime. 

To understand Crime fully we need to look at..

  1. The way in which wealth and power is distributed in society. Here we need to look at the Crimogenic Capitalist system and cyclical economic crises within Capitalism. Also the role of the state in oppressing and marginalising certain groups.
  2. The particular circumstances surrounding the decision of an individual to commit an act of deviance
  3. The deviant act itself and the meaning the individual deviant attaches to it. 
  4. How and why other people in society react to deviance – how do family members, friends and the police react? We also need to look at the media’s power to create ‘folk devils’ 
  5. The reaction needs to be explained in terms of the social structure. How do the public and the police respond to the creation of folk devils ? (the societal reaction)? More broadly, who has the power to make the rules? Why do agents of social control punish some deviant acts more severely than others?
  6. The effect labelling has on the people being labelled. How do  the ‘criminalised’ respond to being labelled?
  7. All of the above together. 

Stuart Hall applied this approach to his study of mugging in the 1970s.  He found that the Government wanted to divert attention away from the economic crisis of the time, so a moral panic was created about black youths in London.  

Criticisms of Radical Criminology. 

Critical Criminology offers us no realistic solution to the problem of crime – if it is Capitalism and the state that are the problems – then a revolution is the only answer. Radical criminology did not receive government funded ‘soft money’ for empiricist research. Some departments closed down. 

It was too idealistic. It is based on some idealised vision of a free future. All capitalist societies are not the same an socialism can be repressive. 

The New Criminology romanticised criminals. In reality most criminals are not struggling against their oppressors in the name of political change, they are just thugs. 

Victim surveys of the 1970s and 80s showed the extent of working class victimisation. They showed us that crime was intra-class, not inter-class. In other words the working classes victimised other working class people, hardly a class struggle against the elite! They ignored the impact street crimes can have on Victims – Left Realism in particular gets back to a ‘victim centred’ approach to crime

They also ignored the victimisation of women. 

The legacy of New Criminology 

Reflecting back on Radical Criminology in the late 1990s, new criminologists accepted some of the criticisms, especially from Feminism. 

In defence of New Criminology they pointed out that it stood up against correctionalism. It encouraged agents of social control to not eradicating deviant behaviour, and encouraged more tolerance!

New Criminology does have a critical legacy. Feminism, Left Realism and Postmodernism are all rooted in the New Criminology . 

Signposting and relevance to A-level sociology

This content is relevant to the crime and deviance aspect of A-level sociology.

How many people are destitute in the UK?

3.8 million people in the United Kingdom experienced destitution in 2022, including 1 million children. This is according to the Destitution in the UK report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

The number of people experiencing destitution has increased by two and half times since 2017. Three times as many children experienced destitution in 2022 compared to 2017.

According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation…

Destitution denotes the most severe form of material hardship. People are considered destitute if they have not been able to meet their most basic physical needs to stay warm, dry, clean and fed.

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2023) Destitution in the UK 2023

The number of people experiencing destitution has increased since both 2019 and 2017.

The main items lacked by people facing destitution in 2023 were food (61%), heating (59%) and clothes (57%).

graphic showing items destitute people can't afford UK 2023

What kinds of people face destitution?

85% of people do not have complex needs, the vast majority are not homeless.

  • 75% of people experiencing destitution are in receipt of some kind of state benefit.
  • Single people are at highest risk of destitution. 60% of those experiencing destitution in 2022 were single.
  • Almost two thirds had a chronic health problem or disability
  • Black led households were three times more likely to experience destitution.

Three main causes of destitution

  • Inadequate benefits. The income threshold for Universal Credit simply doesn’t pay enough for people to meet their basic human needs.
  • Debt. Getting into debt can put people into destitution, trying to get out of debt can keep them there.
  • There is some evidence that Covid-19 was starting point which pushed more people into destitution. However, most people who are destitute in 2022 had been struggling before the pandemic!

Solutions to destitution

Many compassionate people would suggest we need an overhaul of the benefits system. Make sure that Universal Credit pays enough so that people are not destitute. Also we could make it easier for people to access disability payments (PIP) if they are entitled to it. Finally, we need to reform the way we allow people who get into debt to deal with it.

More left leaning sociologists such as Marxists might suggest we need deeper structural reform. We need something in place which makes work less precarious so fewer people are moving in and out of work, for example. Structural reform in terms of more social housing with cheap rent could also help the poorest.

The New Right, in contrast, would say this is precisely what needs to happen to encourage people off benefits.

Signposting

This is a useful update to income and wealth inequalities. This research demonstrates that life is getting tougher for more people at the bottom end!

To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

The Opioid Crisis in the United States: A Corporate Crime?

Drug overdose deaths in the US, notably opioid overdoses, skyrocketed from under 10,000 per year in the 1980s to 100,000 in 2021. The crisis began with the FDA’s approval of Purdue Pharma’s OxyContin Painkiller in 1995, claimed as non-addictive without proper evidence. Subsequent aggressive marketing led to widespread addiction. Labeled as criminal acts of profit-driven corporations and a co-opted FDA, these actions resulted in significant damage with a reported 1 million deaths and cost of $2 trillion, prompting sanctions and funding to combat the crisis.

For most of the 1980s drug overdose deaths in the United States were fairly steady, well under 10 000 deaths per year. 

Then, in the 1990s, deaths rose sharply. By 2000 nearly 20 000 people were dying from overdoses annually. In 2021 the number peaked at 100, 000, a 500% increase over the decade. 

To put this in context, over the past 25 years more than a million people in the U.S. have died from drug overdoses. This is more people than died in both world wars combined. 

Most of these deaths are caused by opioid overdoses. These deaths are from both natural opiates such as morphine and heroin, and synthetic compounds which have similar properties. 

When did the opioid crisis begin?

The crisis began with the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of Purdue Pharma’s OxyContin Painkiller drug in 1995. This drug was designed to be slow release. Purdue claimed that the slow release design would prevent it from being addictive. However, they made this claim without proper evidence. They conducted no clinical trials on how addictive or prone to abuse the drug might be. 

Image of box of Oxycontin pills.
Oxycontin

Before the release of OxyContin opioids had been used only in limited cases. They were only administered to cancer patients, those undergoing more invasive surgery and for end-of-life pain relief. 

However Purdue engaged in aggressive direct marketing campaigns to doctors. The company encouraged Doctors to prescribe OxyContin for less serious conditions such as arthritis, back pain and sports injuries. 

What effect did OxyContin have?

Prescriptions peaked in 2012 at more than 255 million in the U.S. that year. OxyContin, and other similar opioids such as Vicodin create a huge new class of addicts. By 2011 OyxContin was the leading cause of drug-related deaths in the US. 

This is known as the first wave of the crises which also drove the second wage. Many addicts found prescription pain killers too expensive or too difficult to buy and so turned to heroin.  Interviews with injecting urban drug users Between 2008-09 found that 86% of them had used prescription painkillers first. The illegal heroine trade expanded greatly because of this, as did the number of heroin overdoses. 

In 2013 came the third crisis. This was caused by illegal, synthetic opioids such as Fentanyl which is 50 to 100 times stronger than morphine. This led to a huge increase in overdose deaths as the strength of the final street product varied widely. 

Why did the crisis happen?

There are several causes, all of which seem fundamentally linked to the Marxist theory of crime…

The chief executives of Purdue Pharma were primarily concerned with making profit, rather than the safety of people. They didn’t do proper trials to check the risks of addiction and sold their product hard to doctors. 

The Food and Drug Administration had been co-opted by the pharmaceutical industry. The FDA regulatory who oversaw the approval of Oxy, Dr Curtis Wright, left the agency shortly afterwards and took a job at Purdue. 

The U.S. healthcare system prefers prescribing rather than other solutions. This is because it puts profits of corporations over the health and wellbeing of ordinary people. 

Many of these overdose deaths are deaths of despair. They are linked to social ills such as poverty, declining wages, and declining stability in social life. 

What is being done now?

The U.S. has tightened conditions for prescribing opioid Painkillers, but the levels are still high.

They have Sanctions on Chinese companies who make chemicals used to make Fentanyl, 

They have allocated $5 Billion for mental health care and treating addiction.

Analysis: supporting evidence for the Marxist perspective on crime…?

This seems to be a case study which strongly supports the Marxist theory of crime

It clearly shows that all classes commit crime. Here we have both the Corporate elite and the government working together. 

Marxism says the ‘crimes’ (or harms) the elite does are much greater than working class crime. With over 1 million dead as a result of Oxycontin this harmful act is extreme.  There were 100 000 overdose deaths in 2022 – 68% of them linked to Opiods, 2 million addicts, monetary cost $2 Trillion, misery can’t calculate. (According to the Stanford-Lancet Commission). 

The Sackler Family managed to get immunity from prosecution. They have to pay $8 billion in damages. However they have been given a number of years to pay this, and they will probably make that from returns on their investments.

Effectively they haven’t been punished for causing 1 million deaths.

Purdue Pharam and the Opioid crisis: find out more.

Netflix recently released an excellent series: Painkiller which covers this case study very well!

Are Single People Discriminated Against…?

The number of single people has increased over the last several decades. However, there is still something of a stigma attached to being single. Society seems to still be geared towards couples and families as the ‘normal’ social unit. Single people are often overlooked and some sociologists suggest single people may be discriminated against. 

This is according to a recent Analysis podcast on Radio 4

The main reason for the increase in single people is women’s liberation. Women now have higher levels of educational achievement than men and are more likely to be in work. Women are more likely to choose to live alone, and more likely to seek divorce. Of divorced people, men are twice as likely than women to recouple. Many more older women live alone than men. 

Are single people discriminated against?

Some of the ways single people may be discriminated against include:

It is more expensive to live alone. SIngle person households spend 92% of their disposable income on necessities such as housing costs, food and bills. This compares to only 83% of disposable income spent by couples. 

Letting agencies tend to discriminate against single people. They prefer couples because there are two incomes coming in, which they think is more secure. 

Employers and employees expect more from single people as workers. The default view is that single people have fewer commitments outside of work than people with families. Thus it is single people who are expected to work odd hours or at the weekends if required. 

Many holidays are geared towards couples, with single rooms often being the most inferior. 

Getting engaged, married, or having children are seen as social markers of progress. Being single is just kind of overlooked. 

You rarely hear single people talked about in the news, and they are rarely the focus of social policy. There is a lot of talk and policies aimed at helping families, for example, but rarely anything for single people. 

An exception to this was during lockdown. The government announced that people living alone could form support bubbles with people in other households. This was one of the few times single people were explicitly mentioned in social policy. 

Single women living alone are seen in a negative light. We have the spinster stereotype for example. 

All of this is a problem when single people are a diverse group. There are many routes into singledom. 

One of the ways social policy could adapt to single people is by allowing single workers time off to look after friends or pets.

Relevance to A-level sociology

This material is mainly relevant to the families and households module.

People in England and Wales are more class conscious today!

People in England and Wales are more class conscious today than they were in the 1980s!

This is according to the latest British Social Attitudes data. The latest wave of the BSA surveys was carried out between 7th September and 30th October 2022. The sample size was 6638, which is double the usual 3000 respondents. 

Social class identity in Britain in 2022

People today are much more likely to identify as working class. 

  • 29% of people identified as middle class
  • 46% of people identified as working class. 
  • In 2022 people are more likely to identify as either working or middle class rather than ‘no class’.
  • From the 1980s of the 2010s there was a stable level of class identification. Around 30% identified as working class, and 20% as middle class
  • Since 2015 class identification has increased, for both classes. 
  • This is despite the decline in traditionally working class jobs!
graph showing changing social class identities England and Wales 1983 to 2022
PINK: percent identifying middle class, PURPLE: percent identifying working class. England and Wales, 1983 to 2022.

Methodological note 

The survey asked people the following question: 

Do you ever think of yourself as belonging to any particular social class?

  • Yes, middle class
  • Yes, working class
  • Yes (other) please write in
  • No

If they didn’t respond as being either middle or working class a prompt question followed. This referred specifically to being either class. The above figures show the unprompted responses, so people who self-identified as either middle or working class.  

Who identifies as working class?

The job someone does isn’t necessarily related to the social class they feel they are. Although people who do traditionally working class jobs are more likely to identify as working class. 

  • 62% of people in working class jobs identify as working class  
  • 38% of people in middle class jobs identify as working class. 

Level of education is correlated with social class identity 

  • 60% of people who left school with GCSEs as their highest level of qualification identify as working class
  • 28% who went to university identify as social class. 

Somewhat surprisingly income levels are less well correlated with social class identity than education. 52% of those in the lowest quintile identified as working class compared to 32% of those in the highest. 

Attitudes towards social class mobility 

84% of respondents said they thought it was fairly or very difficult to move from one class to another in 2022. This has increased from just 59% of respondents  in 2005. 

table showing attitudes towards social mobility UK

Attitudes to politics and social policy 

Those who self identify as working class are more likely to hold left wing values. They are more likely to be supportive of policies which redistribute wealth and which restrict wealth accumulation. 

Interestingly those who identify as working class are no more likely to hold authoritarian views compared to those who identify as middle class. In other words, working class people are no more likely to ‘blame the immigrants’ for our problems than middle class people. 

Relevance to A-level sociology 

This material is an important update to the social class identity topic. This topic is part of the culture and identity module. 

Sources 

National Centre for Social Research (September 2023) 40 years of British Social Attitudes: Class identity and awareness still matter

Mobile phones and social identity

Rich Ling’s research in Norway between 1997 and 2000 revealed the rise of mobile phones as symbols of identity among teenagers. Initially deemed vulgar and tied to yuppie culture, by 2000 nearly all teenagers owned them, with the model and manner of display reflecting individual and group identity. Ling’s findings suggest that phone choice and presentation is influenced by peer group pressures and are valuable for studying postmodern theories of identity.

Rich Ling conducted interview research on the meaning of mobile phone use among teenagers in Norway (Ling, 2000). (1)

Ling conducted interviews in 1997 and 1999-2000 to uncover attitudes to mobile phones as a fashion item. In 1997 hardly anyone owned a mobile phone, but by 2000 nearly everyone owned them. This is an interesting study showing how this change impacted the relationship between mobile phones and identity.  

Ling saw mobile phone use as a source of group and individual identity. Mobile phones can be used to express both group membership and individual uniqueness. 

Mobile phones are not just a functional device. They are also part of an individual’s personality kit, one of the tools they use to express their identity to others. Among teenagers, the ownership and display of mobile phones is an important part of their lifestyle. 

Mobile Phones, Fashion and identity 

Ling argues fashion is a way individuals communicate intention or status to others. Material objects such as phones help the individual to express group identities, such as those related to class or ethnicity. 

Teenagers in particular are of an age where they need to establish a group identity. But they simultaneously need to collaborate with peers to include themselves in a group and exclude others. 

Fashion is the main way this is achieved, and mobile phones are part of this. However the problem with fashion is that it is always changing. To successfully negotiate group membership, you have to get in on a fashion as it rises in popularity and then out before it declines. 

In terms of mobile phones, you thus need the right mobile at the right time. Some groups subvert this by being anti-fashion, but there is still no escaping it! 

Changing  mobile phone fashions and identity

In 1997 in Norway most teenagers had pagers. At that time mobile phones were associated with yuppie culture and so were not necessarily cool. Those who owned mobile phones and constantly displayed them were seen as vulgar. 

Some teenagers who owned Nokias (a popular phone at that time) and displayed them ostentatiously saw themselves as cool, and as having status. However most others saw them as pretentious, pompous and vulgar. 

By 2000 mobiles were owned by most teenagers and simply owning or not owning one was not a significant source of identity any more. 

By 2000, the age, price and style of mobile phones had become more important as a signifier of identity. 

Having a mobile was no longer thought of as snobby. In just three years since 1997 having an old ‘brick phone’ was seen as embarrassing. Just having one of these marked you as someone who didn’t fit in. 

picture of a Motorola brick phone
The Brick Phone: already unfashionable by 2000!

The way a mobile was displayed was a source of identity. For example, carrying it around on your belt was seen as silly. 

Evaluation 

Ling’s work can be used to criticise postmodern theories of identity. With mobile phones, individuals are not entirely free to choose which ones they use, or how they display them. At least not if they wish to fit in with certain peer groups. 

Peer groups exercise considerable power over the choice of phones individuals make. 

Signposting and relevance to A-level sociology

This post is mainly relevant to the culture and identity module. This module is an option in the first year of the AQA’s A-level sociology specification.

To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

Sources

(1) Ling, R (2000) “We will be reached”: The use of mobile telephony among Norwegian youth.

(2) Brick Phone image source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/redfiremg/3951477167

Bivariate Analysis for Quantitative Social Research

Bivaraiate analysis methods include contigency tables + chi square, Pearson’s R, and Spearman’s Rho,

Bivariate analysis involves analysing two variables at a time in order to uncover whether the two variables are related.

Exploring relationships between variables means searching for evidence that the variation in one variable coincides with variation in another variable.

There are a variety of techniques you can use to conduct bivariate analysis but their use depends on the nature of the two variables being analysed.

Type of variableNominal OrdinalInterval/ RatioDichotomous
NominalContingency table + chi-square + Cramer’s VContingency table + chi-square +Cramer’s VContingency table + chi-square +Cramer’s V, compare means and etaContingency table + chi-square +Cramer’s V
OrdinalContingency table + chi-square + Cramer’s VSpearmans’ rhoSpearmans’ rhoSpearmans’ rho
Interval/ ratioContingency table + chi-square +Cramer’s V, compare means and etaSpearmans’ rhoPearson’s RSpearmans’ rho
Dichotomous Contingency table + chi-square + Cramer’s VSpearmans’ rhoSpearmans’ rhophi
Bivariate analysis for different types of variable

Bivariate Analysis: Relationships, not causality

If there is a relationship between two variables, this does not necessarily mean one causes the other.

Even if there is a causal relationship, we need to take care to make sure the direction of causality is correct. Researchers must be careful not to let their assumptions influence the direction of causality.

For example, Sutton and Rafaeli (1998) conducted bivariate analysis on the relationship between the display of positive emotions by retail staff and levels of retail sales.

Common sense might tell you that positive staff sell more, however Sutton and Rafaeli found that the relationship was the other way around: higher levels of sales resulted in more positive emotions among staff. This was unexpected, but also makes sense.

Sometimes you can infer the direction of causality with 100% certainty. For example with the relationship between age and voting patterns. Younger people are less likely to vote, and thus age must be the independent variable. There is no way voting patterns can influence age.

Contingency Tables

A contingency table is like a frequency table but it allows two variables to be analysed simultaneously so that relationships between them can be examined.

They usually contain percentages since these make the relationships easier to see.

MaleFemale
NumberPercentNumberPercent
Sociology603012040
Maths20106020
English20106020
Dance100506020
200100300100
Students studying subjects in one college, by gender.

The table above contains both the numbers of the variables and their percentages as a proportion of the total next to them.

The percentages are column percentages: they calculate the number in each cell as a percentage of the total number in that column. Hence why the percent columns add up to 100!

In the above table we can see that there are more female students than male students and females dominate in every subject other than dance, because dance is much more popular among male students. (It’s quite an unusual college!)

Contingency tables can be applied to all types of variable, but they are not always an efficient method.

Pearson’s R

Pearon’s R is a method for examining relationships between interval/ ratio variables. The main features of this method of analysis are:

  • The coefficient will lie between 0 and 1 which indicates the strength of a relationship. 0 means no relationship, 1 means a perfect relationship.
  • The closer the coefficient is to one, the stronger the relationship, the closer to 0, the weaker the relationship.
  • The coefficient will either be positive or negative which indicates the direction of the relationship.

Examples of Pearsons’ R correlations

The table below show the relationship between age and four other variables. (Note this data is hypothetical or made up and for illustrative purposes only!)

Age grouphappiness scorewealth £hours watching TV per weekave no of friends
2010£10,000155
308£20,000108
406£30,0003311
504£40,0002210
60-692£50,000916
Pearson’s R-1100.93

The correlations are as follows:

  • between age and happiness: perfect negative correlation.
  • between age and wealth: perfect positive correlation.
  • between age and watching TV: no correlation
  • between age and number of friends: strong positive correlation.

The scatter plots for the above data are as follows:

Age and happiness

Age and wealth

Age and TV

Age and friends

Spearman’s Rho

Spearmans’ Rho is often represented with Greek letter p and is designed for use with ordinal variables. It can also be used when one variable is ordinal and the other is interval/ ratio.

It is exactly the same as Pearson’s R in that the computed value will be between 0 and 1 and either positive or negative.

Pearson’s R can only be used when both variables are interval/ ratio. Spearman’s Rho can be used when on the the variables is ordinal.

Phi and Cramer’s V

The Phi coefficient is used for the analysis of the relationship between two dichotomous variables. Like Pearsons R it results in computed statistic which is either positive or negative and varies between 0 and 1.

Cramer’s V can be used with nominal variables. It can only show the strength of relation between two variables, not the direction.

Cramers’ V is usually reported along with a contingency table and chi-square test.

Comparing means and eta

If you need to examine the relationship between an interval/ ratio variable and a nominal variable if the latter can be relatively unambiguously identified as the independent variable, then it might be useful to compare the means of the interval/ratio variable for each subgroup of the nominal variable.

This procedure is often accompanied by a test of association between variables called eta. The statistic expresses the level of association between the two variables will always be positive.

Eta-squared expresses the amount of variation in the interval/ ratio variable that is due to the nominal variable.

Signposting and sources

This material should be of interest to anyone studying quantitative social research methods.

To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

Bryman, A (2016) Social Research Methods

Postmodern theories of leisure, consumerism and identity

Postmodern theories underline leisure and consumer activities as key sources of identity in postmodern society, contrary to identity formed by work or social class in the modern era. In his book, “Decentring Leisure,” Chris Rojek argues that leisure, often blurred with work, isn’t defined separately but in relation to other experiences. Rojek and later theorists like Scraton and Bramham agree that leisure has transformed with the advent of postmodernity – shifting from a concept of escape to self-indulgence and expression, primarily driven by consumerism and personal lifestyle.

Postmodern theories of identity stress the importance of leisure and consumerism as sources of identity. 

In postmodern society people no longer construct identities from their work, social class background or religion. Rather they construct identities through the products they choose to consume. 

Decentering Leisure 

Chris Rojek explored the changing nature of leisure in his 1995 book ‘Decentring Leisure’. He argued that if we want to understand leisure we must decentralise the concept. By this he meant that we cannot understand leisure by looking at it on its own. We must look at the experience of leisure in relation to other experiences.

Rojek argued that in postmodern society the meaning of leisure had become less clear. 

Modern societies had a relatively clear idea of what leisure was. Leisure was associated with freedom and meant escape from the constraints of limited social roles such as those from work. 

Thus in modern society leisure was not an important part of identity. Identity came from adopting social roles, mainly at work, and then leisure was a time to escape this. 

With postmodernity, the distinction between work and leisure becomes much more confused. For example:

  • Increasing numbers of people work in the leisure industry. 
  • It is easier to find enjoyment in work.
  • Some people even see work as a leisure pursuit. 

Modern societies tended to contrast the authentic with the inauthentic. They saw the authentic as superior to the inauthentic. There was also a tendency to plan leisure activities so they provided a sense of purposes for those involved. 

In postmodern societies people are less likely to seek out authentic activities. They are just as content to play computer games or hang out in virtual worlds as they are to do in real life activities. Leisure also tends to be less planned. People are more likely to just hang out and do activities for the sake of doing them. 

With postmodernisation in postmodern society leisure becomes an end in itself rather than a planned escape from working life. 

Postmodernity, Leisure and Identity 

These changes to the nature of leisure change the way people think about themselves, they change their identities. 

With postmodernity the sense of the integrated self disappears. Postmodern societies become more pluralistic in their lifestyles and identities become less rigid and more fragmented. 

For example in modern societies people saw themselves as passing through distinct stages in a lifecycle. They went from children to teenagers to young adults and middle aged. Each age group had certain leisure pursuits appropriate to it. For example, night clubs were for younger people, knitting at home was for older people. 

However in postmodern society these barriers break down. Older people are more likely to go to nightclubs, younger people are more likely to stay in and knit. 

Identity politics and leisure

Identity politics becomes more important: the ability to choose an identity unconstrained by your background. 

Leisure plays a central role in identity politics. In postmodern society you become who you are through the leisure activities you pursue. This is different to modern societies where your leisure activities reflected who you were based on your social position. 

Evaluations of Rojak 

Rojak exaggerates and simplifies the changes in leisure he claims to have taken place. Leisure in modern and postmodern societies may not be as different and clear cut as he claims. 

In postmodern society people’s ethnicities and jobs are still important sources of identity for some. 

Leisure, postmodernity and identity 

Sheila Scraton and Peter Bramham Drew on the work of E.P. Thompson to argue that Leisure was a product of modernity. With the onset of postmodernity the nature of leisure has changed. 

Before industrialisation and modernity there was no clear distinction between work and leisure. Natural cycles governed time and work and leisure activities were intermingled. 

The advent of modernity and industrialisation changed this. In the factory system workers were paid for their time. This created a strong distinction between work-time and leisure-time. 

In modern societies Fordist production techniques produced standardised goods for mass consumption.  Systematic planning was also part of modernist production. These norms of work all influenced the development of leisure. 

Modernity and leisure

graphic showing how modern society shaped modern leisure.

Organised leisure was part of the modernist project and was organised primarily around social class. 

Leisure was time left over from work which could be filled with free-time activities which supported the existing economic and political structure. 

The state and voluntary sector were involved in organising leisure activities which were supposed to benefit both the individual and society. 

However the idea of rational, planned and organised leisure began to lose influence after World War Two. 

The influence of American culture through rock and roll, the women’s movement and immigration all raised questions about homogenised leisure.

These heralded changes to leisure in postmodern society, when leisure became more diverse and fragmented. 

Postmodern Leisure 

Scraton and Bramham identify three key features of postwar leisure that are postmodern:

  1. Postmodern leisure is based on consumption 
  2. Leisure is an expression of lifestyle 
  3. Leisure is about the body.
Graphic summarising four key points about leisure in postmodern society.

Postmodern leisure is based on consumption 

Postmodern leisure is based on individuals buying goods and services. 

Modern leisure was discipline, postmodern leisure was more about self indulgence. You do what you want rather than doing what others determine is good for you. Postmodern leisure is like shopping: you indulge yourself in exploration and choice. 

Postmodern Leisure is an expression of lifestyle 

Leisure becomes an expression of a lifestyle rather than a search for self-improvement or relaxation. It becomes a playful means to express who you are. Individualism, privatisation and commercialism undermine rational recreation, games, team spirit, fair play and traditional sporting values. People’s identities become wrapped up in the goods they buy rather than being rooted in their jobs, families or communities. 

Postmodern leisure is about the body

Postmodern leisure involves an increasing concern with the body. In modernity rational leisure was concerned with health and fitness, postmodern leisure is about achieving the desired body shape as an expression of the self. 

Evaluating of postmodern theories of leisure

Scraton and Bamham argue that these changes affect some groups more than others. 

Many people do not have the money to engage in consumption to construct an identity. For those on low incomes shopping is still just a means to buy food and clothes to survive. 

Leisure also remains gendered. Video games and sex tourism. 

Racism may also prevent some ethnic minority groups from accesses certain types of leisure activity. 

For the over 50s clearly enjoying, but for many leisure is limited by resources and still remains linked to work! 

Sources and Signposting

This material is mainly relevant to the culture and identity option.

To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

No Jail Time for a £400 Million Tax Fraud!

In October 2023, Bernie Ecclestone, who evolved Formula One into a global brand, was found guilty of tax evasion amounting to £400 million. Originating from a 2015 case, the 92-year-old was sentenced to 17 months jail, suspended due to his age, and fined over £650 million. Critics argue this punishment is lenient, underlining the £400 million impact on UK tax revenue and upholding the Marxist perspective that justice is softer on the affluent.

Bernie Ecclestone was found guilty of tax evasion in October 2023. The total amount of tax he evaded paying was around £400 million (1)

The case dates back to 2015 when he had a meeting with UK tax officers from the HMRC. He failed to declare that he was paying into one particular trust in Singapore, money which he should have been paying tax on.

image of headline: Ecclestone tax fraud October 2023

He must have paid in HUGE sums to this trust and made huge profits to have run up a £400M tax bill (which he evaded). The profits would have been at least double that amount!

He plead guilty to this charge and was given a 17th month jail sentence and a fine, meaning he will have to pay just over £650 million to the UK tax authority, and £74 000 in costs to the prosecution.

His sentence was suspended so he won’t spend any time in jail, the judge saying this is because of his age. He is 92.

A massive crime with a weak punishment

This is a clear case of tax evasion (2). Ecclestone knowingly concealed information about his finances from the HMRC to not pay tax. This is illegal and carries a maximum penalty of seven years in jail and a 200% max fine.

Bernie received 17 months suspended and his penalty seems to be around 60%.

I understand suspending the sentence because he is 92, kind of fair enough. But as a symbolic message this hardly seems an appropriate penalty.

The harm Ecclestone caused to British society is £400 million lost tax revenue. That is 1/10th of the entire annual tax gap for tax evasion in the UK (3).

You might remember that a number of schools closed because of crumbling concrete earlier this year. The total estimated cost of repairing all of them is £150 million. That’s just one of the things Bernie’s tax could have prevented, had he paid it.

But no, he preferred to squirrel it away in a trust fund so he could pass it on to his undeserving children. And received no real punishment.

Who is Bernie Ecclestone?

He ran Formula one from the late 1970s until 2017, during which time he grew it into a global brand. Ecclestone essentially made F1 into one of the most valuable global media assets. It sits between the motor industry and a global audience.

According to the The Forbes Billionaires rich list his net worth is around $3 billion. (2). So yes the £600 million fine will hurt, but he’ll still have over $2 billion left.

Sociological analysis

This case study is an excellent example which supports the Marxist perspective on crime. According to Marxists the criminal justice system punishes the rich less than the poor. This is precisely what is happening here.

There’s no real debate about it, it’s just very strong supporting evidence for the continued relevance of Marxism today!

To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

Sources

(1) The Guardian (October 2023) Bernie Ecclestone given suspended sentence after pleading guilty to fraud.

(2) Wikipedia: Bernie Ecclestone

(3) Patrick Canon: UK Tax Evasion statistics 2020.