300 Sozialwissenschaften
Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (3) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2024 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Preprint (1)
Language
- English (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Keywords
- continuation thesis (1)
- curtailment thesis (1)
- dating (1)
- discretion (1)
- enablement thesis (1)
- experiment (1)
- gender (1)
- marriage (1)
- mating (1)
- observational data (1)
Institute
The growing use of digital tools in policy implementation has altered the work of street-level bureaucrats who are granted substantial discretionary power in decision-making. Digital tools can constrain discretionary power, like the curtailment thesis proposed, or serve as action resources, like the enablement thesis suggested. This article assesses empirical evidence of the impact of digital tools on street-level work and decision-making in service-oriented and regulation-oriented organisations based on a systematic literature review and thematic qualitative content analysis of 36 empirical studies published until 2021. The findings demonstrate different effects with regard to the role of digital tools and the core tasks of the public administration, depending on political and managerial goals and consequent system design. Leading or decisive digital tools mostly curtail discretion, especially in service-oriented organisations. In contrast, an enhanced information base or recommendations for actions enable decision-making, in particular in regulation-oriented organisations. By showing how street-level bureaucrats actively try to resist the curtailing effects caused by rigid design to address individual circumstances, for instance by establishing ways of coping like rule bending or rule breaking, using personal resources or prioritising among clients, this study demonstrates the importance of the continuation thesis and the persistently crucial role of human judgement in policy implementation.
Does working in a gender-atypical occupation reduce individuals’ likelihood of finding a different-sex romantic partner, and do such occupational partnership penalties contribute to occupational gender segregation? To answer this question, we theorized partnership penalties for working in gender-atypical occupations by drawing on insights from evolutionary psychology, social constructivism, and rational choice theory and exploited the stability of occupational pathways in Germany. In Study 1, we analyzed observational data from a national probability sample (N= 1,634,944) to assess whether individuals in gender-atypical occupations were less likely to be partnered than individuals who worked in gender typical occupations. To assess whether the observed partnership gaps found in Study 1 were causally related to the gender typicality of men’s and women’s occupations, we conducted a field experiment on a dating app (N = 6,778). Because the findings from Study 2 suggested that young women and men indeed experienced penalties for working in a gender-atypical occupation (at least when they were not highly attractive), we employed a choice-experimental design in Study 3 (N = 1,250) to assess whether women and men were aware of occupational partnership penalties and showed that anticipating occupational partnership penalties may keep young and highly educated women from working in gender-atypical occupations. Our main conclusion therefore is that that observed penalties and their anticipation seem to be driven by unconscious rather than conscious processes.
Social institutions
(2024)
Social institutions are a system of behavioral and relationship patterns that are densely interwoven and enduring and function across an entire society. They order and structure the behavior of individuals in core areas of society and thus have a strong impact on the quality of life of individuals. Institutions regulate the following: (a) family and relationship networks carry out social reproduction and socialization; (b) institutions in the realm of education and training ensure the transmission and cultivation of knowledge, abilities, and specialized skills; (c) institutions in the labor market and economy provide for the production and distribution of goods and services; (d) institutions in the realm of law, governance, and politics provide for the maintenance of the social order; (e) while cultural, media, and religious institutions further the development of contexts of meaning, value orientations, and symbolic codes.