{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0231535077564251, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0018522806205140078, 'mean_word_length': 5.3622974963181145, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Handbook of Political Conflict: Theory and Practice

With increasing size and differentiation of social units, people will become subject to intensities of social control alien to contemporary life. Gibbs challenges social scientists to question current conceptualizations of norms, deviance, and social control so as to reformulate theories of social control. To the extent that sociological theory addresses it, social control has always been assumed to automatically flow from organizations and institutions. The first half of the book evaluates definitions of norms, deviance, and social control. Gibbs identifies problems which arise when norms are applied, including failure to recognize "that a belief cannot be a norm of a social unit unless it is shared . . . by all members. . . ." (p. 4). No minimum proportion of members subscribing to the belief is stipulated. For decades sociologists defined deviance as behavior contrary to norms. More recently, many have abandoned this normative conception for the labeling perspective, failing to understand that the term deviance denotes not a single argument but three distinct arguments—reactive conception of deviance, theory of secondary deviance, and societal reaction theory. After examining definitions of social control in terms of their answers to six central questions, Gibbs concludes compelling evidence exists to embrace his definition which treats social control as a multityped rather than a unitary phenomenon. The remaining half of the book details and defends "the final definition" and concludes with a theory of social control. The definition's triadic character stipulates that at least three individuals are involved in each of five types of social control. The manipulation of the second party's behavior by the first party through a third party distinguishes it from externalistic control. Gibbs challenges other conceptions, especially the "prophylactic conception" which equates social control with the counteraction of deviance. Toward additional theories, Gibbs examines correlates of his five types and conditions under which each will be effective. The most relevant conditions are size of social unit and degree of internal sociocultural differentiation (limited to status differentiation and normative consensus). His table (p. 152) summarizes along two axes (size and sociocultural differentiation) the relations among the types of social units. The frequency of each type of control in a social unit is expressed as a ratio to the frequency of some other type. The order in which the types become frequent is referential, allegative, vicarious, modulative, and prelusive, with each type of control giving way to another as size and differentiation increase. Gibbs concludes with a research strategy which includes testing generalizations through comparisons (1) of different social units at the same point in time and (2) of social units of the same type. The initial importance of the research is more inherent in its demonstration of empirical applications of the conceptualization than in its support of specific generalizations. Although sociological references dominate, Gibbs's conceptualization should attract the interest of political scientists. Far from ignoring differential power, his conceptualization of social control virtually presumes it. For each type of control there is a corresponding type of power. When Gibbs's research strategy compares units of the same type, he anticipates that the relations postulated also hold for all types of social units. Despite incisive critiques of current definitions and advancement of alternative conceptualizations of social control for theoretical formulations, it is doubtful the book will attract a wide readership. It might be used as a supplementary text, though probably not as a primary one. Gibbs's final conception is "ponderous" and consists of "very abstract notions" and terms "alien to other definitions of social control" (p. 78). Although he attempts clarification through illustration, the book remains difficult. It would not be suitable for the average undergraduate and perhaps not even for a beginning graduate student. Benefit from this work presumes an appreciation of conceptualizing and theorizing, in contrast to today's vocational training mentality.