Hypothesis: Those persons who previously had the Master status are less likely to experience the role exit or become an ‘ex’
Independent variable: The current absence of the Master status. To state the absence of the Master status currently and the presence of the status previously, it is necessary to ask the following questions: What is the person’s current status? Did the person have the Master status previously?
Response categories in this case are ‘yes’ and ‘no’ in order to determine the current absence of the Master status in relation to the concrete person.
Dependent variable: The situation of becoming an ‘ex’ or the experience of the role exit process. Did the person feel frustration, anxiety, or dissatisfaction associated with disengaging from various significant roles associated with the Master status? To what extent is your status influential to evoke your negative feelings associated with becoming an ‘ex’?
Response categories: ‘Yes’ and ‘no’ to answer the first question. If the answer is ‘yes’, there are four response categories which are ‘not at all influential’, ‘moderately influential’, ‘very influential’, and ‘extremely influential’.
Symbolic Interaction Theory: The society can be discussed as the result of people’s everyday interactions. These interactions are different, depending on the specific situations. Thus, ongoing interactions create the specific reality in which individuals live and communicate. Much attention is paid to the subjective vision of the reality (Macionis 38-44). The Symbolic Interaction theory is effective to support the hypothesis in relation to the fact that those persons who change their Master status are inclined to feel dissatisfied while focusing on the role exit. The problem is in the fact that the character of these people’s interactions changes as well as the character of experienced situations. These persons need time to adapt to the new reality.
Hypothesis: Those poor persons who blame themselves for living in poverty are more likely to rely on the principle of the social mobility and work to go upward
Independent variable: Poor persons blaming themselves for living in poverty. To support this variable, it is necessary to ask the following question: What is the percentage of poor Americans who blame themselves for living in poverty instead of blaming the society?
Response categories related to this question can range from 0% to 100% in order to state the percentage of the Americans discussing themselves as responsible for living in poverty.
Dependent variable: Reliance on the principle of the social mobility. To state this variable, it is important to answer the following question: How many Americans choose to follow the principle of social mobility and work to go upward and change their social status and overcome poverty?
Response categories: Responses are documented in relation to the percent, and they can range from 0% to 100%.
Conflict Theory: The society’s development is based on the principles of a conflict. As a result, the people’s social position is influenced by the unequal distribution of resources in the society. Some people can benefit from this distribution when the other ones do not receive any rewards (Macionis 34-38). From this perspective, the fact that some people are rich and the other ones live in poverty depends on the inequality of the resources distribution. The poor people understand the inequality and the social conflict between classes most clearly, and they often try to challenge the inequality while focusing on the idea of social mobility. Working hard, poor people try to go upward on the social stairs.
Works Cited
Macionis, John. Society: The Basics. USA: Pearson, 2010. Print.