Institute of Sociology NASU

The phenomenon of sociocultural dissensus: theoretical interpretations and empirical research in world sociology

stmm. 2025 (4): 149-179

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2025.04.149

Full text: https://stmm.in.ua/archive/ukr/2025-4/9.pdf

YAROSLAV REZNIK, Master of Sociology, Student of PhD Program at the Department of Methodology and Methods of Sociological Research, Faculty of Sociology, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (4d, Hlushkova Av., Kyiv, 03022)

yaroslav.reznik3@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7827-0437

The article reviews theoretical interpretations and empirical studies of sociocultural dissensus in world sociology. The interpretation of the phenomenon of dissensus in the works of R. Dahrendorf, E. Shils, V. Aubert, W. Wallace, and others is analyzed. In these works, the sociological concept of dissensus is presented as a theoretical antipode and complement to the concept of consensus. The concepts of consensus and dissensus were developed in the competing macrosociological theoretical traditions of structural functionalism and social conflict theories but are mutually complementary in a common analytical context of research. The features of the operationalization and empirical identification of consensus/dissensus in the works of W.G. Runciman and T.J. Scheff are described. The conceptual and formal models of consensus/dissensus measurement by P.H. Rossi and R.A. Berk are analyzed. Empirical indicators of sociocultural consensus/dissensus in various sociological studies are considered based on the study of the works of M. Mann, N. Stehr, P.M. Baker, J. Markoff, Z. Sawiński and H. Domański, R. Rose and T. Makkai, C. Grafton and A. Permaloff, I. Down and C.J. Wilson, T. González-Arteaga, J.C.R. Alcantud and R. de Andrés Calle, A. Roberts. This methodological experience indicates a thorough development of the methodological issues of empirical sociological research in world sociology and can be used in the study of various sociocultural distinctions in Ukraine.

Keywords: consensus, dissensus, sociocultural distinctions, conflict, operationalization, measurement, model

References:

1. Akiyama, Y., Nolan, J., Darrah, M., Abdal Rahem, M., Wang, L. (2016). A method for measuring consensus within groups: An index of disagreement via conditional probability. Information Sciences, 345(Suppl. C), 116-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2016.01.052

2. Aubert, V. (1963). Competition and Dissensus: Two Types of Conflict and of Conflict Resolution. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 7(1), 26-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200276300700105

3. Baker, P.M. (1980). Consensus and Dissensus in the Attribution of Status and Equity: Comment on Nock and Rossi and on Alves and Rossi. American Journal of Sociology, 86(3), 641-643. https://doi.org/10.1086/227287

4. Berkovitch, N., Bradley, K. (1999). The Globalization of Women's Status: Consensus/Dissensus in the World Polity. Sociological Perspectives, 42(3), 481-498. https://doi.org/10.2307/1389699

5. Bryant, C.D. (Ed.). (1971). Social Problems Today: Dilemmas and Dissensus. Philadelphia [etc.]: J.B. Lippincott Company.

6. Dahrendorf, R. (1958). Out of Utopia: Toward a Reorientation of Sociological Analysis. American Journal of Sociology, 64(2), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1086/222419

7. Dahrendorf, R. (1959). Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

8. Down, I., Wilson, C.J. (2008). From 'Permissive Consensus' to 'Constraining Dissensus': A Polarizing Union? Acta Politica, 43, 26-49. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500206

9. Dynes, R.R., Clarke, A.C., Dinitz, S., Ishino, I. (1964). Social Problems: Dissensus and Deviation in an Industrial Society. New York: Oxford University Press.

10. Golovakha, Ye., Panina, N. (2009). Main Stages and Tendencies in Transformation of Ukrainian Society: From Perestroika to Orange Revolution. In: Ye. Golovakha (Ed.), Ukrainian Sociological Review 2006-2007 (pp. 3-24). Kyiv: Institute of Sociology, NASc of Ukraine. Retrieved from: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-106625

11. González-Arteaga, T., Alcantud, J.C.R., de Andrés Calle, R. (2016). Decision Support. A cardinal dissensus measure based on the Mahalanobis distance. European Journal of Operational Research, 251, 575-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.11.019

12. Grafton, C., Permaloff, A. (2001). Public Policy for Business and the Economy: Ideological Dissensus, Change and Consensus. Policy Sciences, 34(3-4), 403-434. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012713613468

13. Imbert, P. (Ed.). (2006). Converging Disensus: Cultural Transformations and Corporate Cultures: Canada and the Americas. Ottawa: University of Ottawa; Research Chair on Social and Cultural Challenges in a Knowledge-Based Society.

14. Kononov, I., Khobta, S. (2015). Public Opinion in the Donbas and Halychyna on the Ukraine's Upheavals of Winter 2013-Summer 2014. In: V. Stepanenko, Y. Pylynskyi (Eds.), Ukraine after the Euromaidan: Hopes and Challenges (pp. 181-191). Bern; Berlin; Bruxelles; Frankfurt am Main; New York; Oxford; Wien: Peter Lang.

15. Laing, R., Phillipson, H., Lee, A.R. (1966). Interpersonal Perception: A Theory and a Method of Research. New York: Springer Pub. https://doi.org/10.2307/588644

16. Mann, M. (1970). The Social Cohesion of Liberal Democracy. American Sociological Review, 35(3), 423-439. https://doi.org/10.2307/2092986

17. Markoff, J. (1982). Suggestions for the Measurement of Consensus. American Sociological Review, 47(2), 290-298. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094970

18. Parsons, T. (1949). The Structure of Social Action. A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of Recent European Writers. 2nd ed. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

19. Parsons, T., Shils, E.A., Allport, G.W. et al. (1962). Some Fundamental Categories of the Theory of Action: A General Statement. In: T. Parsons, E. Shils (Eds.), Toward a General Theory of Action (pp. 3-29). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351301527-2

20. Roberts, A. (2020). Consensus and dissensus in comparative politics: Do comparativists agree on the goals, methods, and results of the field? International Political Science Review, 41(4), 490-506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512119858370

21. Rose, R., Makkai, T. (1995). Consensus or dissensus about welfare in post-communist societies? European Journal of Political Research, 28(2), 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1995.tb00810.x

22. Rossi, P.H., Berk, R.A. (1985). Varieties of Normative Consensus. American Sociological Review, 50(3), 333-347. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095543

23. Runciman, W.G. (1962). A Method for Cross-National Comparison of Political Consensus. The British Journal of Sociology, 13(2), 151-155. https://doi.org/10.2307/587891

24. Sawiński, Z., Domański, H. (1991). Dissensus in Assessments of Occupational Prestige: The Case of Poland. European Sociological Review, 7(3), 253-265. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.esr.a036604

25. Scheff, T.J. (1967). Toward a Sociological Model of Consensus. American Sociological Review, 32(1), 32-46. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091716

26. Shils, E. (1958). The Intellectuals and the Powers: Some Perspectives for Comparative Analysis. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 1(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500000049

27. Shils, E.A. (1961a). The Macrosociological Problem: Consensus and Dissensus in the Larger Society. In: D.P. Ray (Ed.), Trends in Social Science (pp. 60-83). New York: Philosophical Library.

28. Shils, E. (1961b). Centre and periphery. In: The Logic of Personal Knowledge: Essays Presented to Michael Polanyi on his seventieth birthday, 11th March 1961 (pp. 117-130). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

29. Shils, E. (1965). Charisma, Order and Status. American Sociological Review, 30(2), 199-213. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091564

30. Shulga, O. (2015). Consequences of the Maidan: War of Symbols, Real War and Nation Building. In: V. Stepanenko, Y. Pylynskyi (Eds.), Ukraine after the Euromaidan: Hopes and Challenges (pp. 231-239). Bern; Berlin; Bruxelles; Frankfurt am Main; New York; Oxford; Wien: Peter Lang.

31. Stehr, N. (1974). Consensus and Dissensus in Occupational Prestige. The British Journal of Sociology, 25(4), 410-427. https://doi.org/10.2307/590152

32. Trimikliniotis, N. (2019). Migration and the Refugee Dissensus in Europe. Borders, Security and Austerity. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429443992

33. Tsuchiya, Y., Hiramoto, N. (2018). Measuring consensus and dissensus: A generalized index of disagreement using conditional probability. Information Sciences, 439-440, 50-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2018.02.003

34. Vyshniak, O. (2015). The Maidan and Post-Maidan Ukraine: Public Attitudes in Regional Dimensions. In: V. Stepanenko, Y. Pylynskyi (Eds.), Ukraine after the Euromaidan: Hopes and Challenges (pp. 171-179). Bern; Berlin; Bruxelles; Frankfurt am Main; New York; Oxford; Wien: Peter Lang.

35. Wallace, W.L. (1986). Social Structural and Cultural Structural Variables in Sociology. Sociological Focus, 19(2), 125-138.

Received 17.06.2025