British Journal of Sociology最新文献

This paper investigates the causal effect of motherhood on women's occupational class trajectories—the Motherhood Class Penalty—using data from the 1970 British Cohort Study. We apply sequence optimal matching alongside other matching techniques to construct counterfactual class trajectories for mothers in the UK. Our results show that motherhood significantly increases downward mobility and limits access to professional occupations. Low professional women face an estimated 15% penalty, while high professional women experience a 5% penalty compared to their childless counterparts. We find that professional-class women are more likely to remain attached to the labour market after childbirth, whereas working-class mothers are at greater risk of permanently exiting the workforce. Among all groups, low professional women experience the most significant forgone upward mobility, highlighting how motherhood penalties vary across the class spectrum. These findings stress the substantial human capital loss associated with motherhood in the UK and suggest that occupational penalties are shaped by existing socio-economic hierarchies, potentially reinforcing broader patterns of inequality.

Scholars of the welfare state have long argued that, in liberal democracies, welfare state expansion depends on successful coalitions in its favour. Under what circumstances do these coalitions form? Party systems, economic interest, and political mobilisation have all been thought to influence the emergence of coalitions for welfare state expansion. In this article, I argue that law plays a critical role in facilitating the last of these factors. Drawing on a growing body of literature that sees law as constitutive of, rather than merely reflective of, social relations, I demonstrate that available legal forms meaningfully inform opportunities for welfare coalitions. In particular, I examine how debates over what a trade union is—a voluntary association of individuals, or a corporate body deserving of a state statute—shaped coalitions for welfare reform in the US and the UK at the turn of the twentieth century.

Tracing the early adoption of computer gang databases by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and the Los Angeles Police Department in the 1980s to the deployment of computationally-assisted surveillance during the Vietnam War, this paper uses a genealogical approach to compare surveillance technologies developed across the arc of colonial racial capitalism-from the Age of Imperialism through the Cold War and into the historical present. Specifically analyzing technologies displayed at the 1902-03 Hanoi Exposition in French Indochina and the 1964-65 New York World's Fair during the Cold War, it positions Southeast Asia is an important case because much of the primary architecture for the development of the modern American surveillance state historically arose from attempts to manage anti-imperial resistance across the decolonizing Pacific. The analysis connects how early anthropometric measurement and recordkeeping practices under French colonial rule transformed through the widespread adoption of computational tools for postwar technocratic planning during the American War in Vietnam, demonstrating a rationalization of surveillance over time as economies of accumulation and disposal interacted with technological innovations in bureaucratic management to maximize means-end, state-market efficiencies. Ultimately the analysis offers the concept of the coloniality of data, showing how global interpellations of the locatable criminal body in local, national, and international databases continue to constitute data itself as a rationalized-and increasingly automated-technology of imperial power.

The authors regret that, due to a coding error, the measure of parental leave was incorrect for graduates taking leave from 2017. Correcting this error increases the number of social scientists with registered parental leave from 383 to 428.

Re-estimated models using the corrected measure closely replicate the published results. The study's conclusions remain unchanged, with one exception: the main effect of parental leave reported in Table 4 (Model 6) is no longer statistically significant. However, consistent with the published version, the interaction between gender and parental leave remains statistically significant, indicating that parental leave negatively predicts women's advancement more than men's (interaction coefficient: −0.305, 95% CI: −0.532 to −0.077).

The updated KHB decomposition (Table 5) also mirrors the published results. Parental leave now accounts for the largest share of the indirect effect (18.56% vs. 14.63% in the published results), followed by coauthor-adjusted articles (17.13% vs. 17.43% in the published results). In total, 43.42% of the gender gap in advancement is mediated by parent- and productivity-related factors (vs. 39.71% in the published results).

Figures 2 and 3 have been updated to reflect the corrected estimates: predicted probabilities of attaining a senior research position from regressions adjusting for parental leave and performance (Figure 2, panels B and C) and predicted probabilities of attaining a senior research position by months of parental leave (Figure 3, panels A and B). Complete regression tables with corrected estimates are available in Supporting Information S1.

The authors apologize for any inconvenience this error may have caused.