Michèle Lamont

Bio: Michèle Lamont is an academic researcher from Harvard University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Sociology of culture & Racism. The author has an hindex of 49, co-authored 160 publications receiving 17307 citations. Previous affiliations of Michèle Lamont include Princeton University & University of Michigan.

European Studies in the United States: Current Challenges and Prospects for the Future

Abstract: The future of European Studies in the United States is certainly dim, if one presumes that it will parallel the declining importance of “old, tired Europe” for the United States, and for American foreign policy more specifically.1 Alternatively, it could be viewed in a more positive light if one emphasizes the lasting legacy of the European enlightenment for the United States and for world culture, even while China and India are gaining in global importance.

Valuation Studies? Our Collective Two Cents

Abstract: This article presents the results of a poll made among the members of the editorial and advisory boards of Valuation Studies. The purpose is to overview the topic that is the remit of the new journal. The poll focused on three questions:1. Why is the study of valuation topical?2. What specific issues related to valuation are the most pressing ones to explore?3. What sites and methods would be interesting for studying valuation?The answers to these questions provided by sixteen board members form the basis of the article. Based on these answers, it identifies a number of themes concerning the study of valuation, elaborating on the rationale for attending to valuation, the conceptual challenges linked to this, and the specific issues and sites that deserve further attention.

The world is not a field: An interview with Michèle Lamont

Abstract: In this interview, Michele Lamont discusses her intellectual trajectory in relation to other sociologists and research fields. The starting point is her relationship to Bourdieu’s field theory in 1980s Paris. She describes how her empirically grounded work developed as a critique of Bourdieu’s oeuvre yet draws heavily on it. A common thread in her work is a focus on social and symbolic boundaries and their relation to evaluation and pluralism, which she has extended from her early studies of class boundaries to empirical and theoretical work, ranging from more general cultural processes of inequality and stigmatization, to knowledge production and evaluation in academia. The importance of cumulative work in sociology and the value of a plurality of criteria of worth across different domains emerge as two central themes in the interview. Finally, Lamont reflects on the current status of the sociology discipline and its role in the public sphere. The interview took place in Lund on 7 March 2018, where Lamont was invited keynote speaker at the Sociologidagarna 2018 conference. (Less)

Making Sense of Reality Together : Interdisciplinary "Ways of Seeing"

Abstract: Pragmatic Inquiry brings together a remarkably creative transcontinental and interdisciplinary group of researchers who met on a regular basis over four years to explore together novel analytical tools to make sense and account for social reality. It will give the reader a renewed sense of possibilities for capturing social complexity. Each chapter zooms in on a different conceptual device that aims to illuminate relatively unexplored aspects of reality. The authors draw on the work of influential scholars – for instance, Foucault’s notion of “dispositif” – but they go beyond them by digging in greater depth, extending and transposing such concepts to new objects.

In a Different Voice. Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA (Harvard University Press) 1982.

Abstract: Introduction 1. Woman's Place in Man's Life Cycle 2. Images of Relationship 3. Concepts of Self and Morality 4. Crisis and Transition 5. Women's Rights and Women's Judgment 6. Visions of Maturity References Index of Study Participants General Index

The WEIRDest People in the World

Abstract: Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

The Complexity of Intersectionality

Abstract: Since critics first allegedthat feminism claimed tospeak universally for all women, feminist researchers havebeen acutely aware ofthe limitations of genderas a single analyticalcategory. In fact, feministsare perhaps alone in the academy in theextent to which theyhave embraced intersectionality – the relationshipsamong multiple dimensions andmodalities of social relations and subject formations – as itselfa central category ofanalysis. One could evensay that intersectionality isthe most important theoreticalcontribution that women’s studies,in conjunction with relatedfields, has made sofar.1