Sociology

Objective

Course Overview

Why is society so hard to change? To answer this question, this course begins by challenging one of our strongest intuitions: that our preferences, identities, and behaviors originate primarily within ourselves. The first half of the semester asks how society shapes individuals. We examine how socialization forms dispositions, how norms regulate behavior, how group boundaries are so cially constructed, and how our preferences continue to be shaped through interaction with others.

The second half reverses the direction of explanation, asking instead how these repeated interac tions between individuals can generate large-scale social phenomena that no one intended, from segregation and the reproduction of inequality to the diffusion of attitudes and behaviors.

Structure and Objectives

Together, the sessions trace the continuous interplay between individuals and society: society shapes individuals, whose interactions reproduce social structures that, in turn, shape subse quent opportunities. The course culminates in a return to its central question-why society is so hard to change-and explores how sociological explanations help identify more effective points of intervention.

Each session combines a lecture with the discussion of research articles. Over the semester, stu dents work in groups of four to give a 15-minute presentation on an article of their choice from the course syllabus. Each student takes primary responsibility for one of the following questions: What is the puzzle? What explanation does the paper propose? What is its empirical strategy? Are you convinced? The first session introduces this exercise through practice presentations. Stu dents who are not presenting are encouraged to read the article beforehand; the presentations are designed to make each paper accessible to everyone. By the end of the course, students should have: 1. a good understanding of contemporary sociology; 2. familiarity with mechanism-based explanations; 3. the ability to critically read quantitative sociological research articles.

Assessment

(i) Group presentation (40%) Groups of four students give a 15 minute presentation on one article from the course syllabus (see details above).

(ii) Written exam (60%) A 1.5-hour closed-book exam. Students choose one essay question from a selection of ten. Answers are assessed on their understanding of the course material: their use of sociological explanations and references to empirical evidence, and their critical evaluation of competing explanations. While the course will be taught in English, students may give their presentations and write the final exam in either English or French.

Planning

Session 1 – What is Sociology? What Is a Good Sociological Explanation?

Session 2 – Socialization, the Individual, and Society 

Session 3 – Social Norms and Their Enforcement

Session 4 – Group Boundaries

Session 5 – Social Influence

Session 6 – How Can We Identify Social Influence?

Session 7 – Structure and the Micro–Macro Link: Segregation

Session 8 – Diffusion and Social Change

Session 9 – Networks and the Amplification of Disadvantage

Session 10 – Why Inequalities Persist

Session 11 – Synthesis: Why Is Society So Hard to Change?

References

Watts, Duncan J. 2014. “Common Sense and Sociological Explanations.” American Journal of Sociology 120(2): 313–351.

Kiley, Kevin, and Stephen Vaisey. 2020. “Measuring Stability and Change in Personal Culture Using Panel Data.” American Sociological Review 85(3): 477–506.

Gelfand, Michele J., et al. 2011. ”Differences Between Tight and Loose Cultures: A 33 Nation Study.” Science 332(6033): 1100–1104.

Abascal, Maria. 2020. “Contraction as a Response to Group Threat: Demographic Decline and Whites’ Classification of People Who Are Ambiguously White.” American Sociological Review 85(2): 298–322.

Salganik, Matthew J., Peter Sheridan Dodds, and Duncan J. Watts. 2006. “Experimen tal Study of Inequality and Unpredictability in an Artificial Cultural Market.” Science 311(5762): 854–856.

Paluck, Elizabeth Levy, Hana Shepherd, and Peter M. Aronow. 2016. ”Changing Climates of Conflict: A Social Network Experiment in 56 Schools.” PNAS 113(3): 566–571.

Schelling, Thomas C. 1971. “Dynamic Models of Segregation.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1(2): 143–186

Saetre, Juliette. 2025. ”How Protests Spread: Diasporas, Wide Bridges, and the Transna tional Diffusion of Un violador en tu camino.” American Journal of Sociology 131(1): 1–47

DiMaggio, Paul, and Filiz Garip. 2011. “How Network Externalities Can Exacerbate Inter group Inequality.” American Journal of Sociology 116(6): 1887–1933.

Van de Rijt, Arnout, Soong Moon Kang, Michael Restivo, and Akshay Patil. 2014. “Field Experiments of Success-Breeds-Success Dynamics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111(19): 6934–6939.