Social Problems and Social Issues

Social construction

The way people assign meaning to the world (Best 11). • Parts of the social world that are created by people as they interact with one another under particular social, political, and economic conditions.

Knowledge is made

Social construction idea that what counts as ‘true’ or ‘normal’ depends on social context.

Language matters

Social construction idea that the words and categories we use shape how we understand the world.

Learning is social

Social construction idea that people develop through interaction with others, not in isolation.

Objectivist approach

Attempts to measure the characteristics of harmful conditions. • Defines a social problem as a social condition or pattern of behavior that has negative consequences for individuals and our social and physical worlds. • Notes that harmful conditions are not always identified as social conditions.

Subjectivist approach

Negative conditions are not viewed as problems because of objective standards. • Social problems are understood according to people’s responses to, and perceptions of, harmful conditions. • Approach that relies on individual opinions about what counts as a social problem.

Social problem (objectivist definition)

A social condition or pattern of behavior that has negative consequences for individuals and our social and physical worlds.

Claim

A statement asserting that a condition is troubling or harmful.

Claimsmaking

Asserting that a condition should be perceived as a social problem.

Claimsmakers

Individuals or groups seeking to convince others that a condition is troubling and that something should be done.

Rhetoric

The study of persuasion.

Rhetorical

Why constructing social problems is described this way: claimsmakers attempt to persuade others that something is a social problem.

Grounds

The portion of a claim that argues that a troubling condition exists.

Warrants

The portion of a claim that explains why something should be done about a social problem.

Conclusions

Statements that specify what should be done and what actions should be taken to address the social problem.

Typifying example

An example, often extreme, dramatic, disturbing, or memorable, that grounds often start with; generally not representative of the problem.

Symptomatic of a larger social crisis

How grounds name and argue the problem: as a sign of this.

Statistics

Used in grounds, not necessarily accurate, to leverage scientific appeal and suggest the scope of the condition.

Values and emotions

What warrants often use to justify action.

Multiple warrants

Why claimsmakers use these: different people have different values, so they cover the reasons why people might care.

Proposed solutions must be in line with the grounds and warrants

Requirement for conclusions.

Policies and bills

The final products conclusions aim for in order to resolve problems.

Domain expansion

Claimsmakers broaden the definition of the problem, adding in more victims to help and villains to confront.

Piggybacking

Claimsmakers rely on established problems and allow newer claims to build upon older ones.

Outsider claimsmakers

Activists and social movements, who rely mainly on the media (and the public) to reach policymakers.

Insider claimsmakers

Lobbyists and pressure groups, who reach policymakers directly.

Outsider claimsmaking

Activists and social movements send their claims mostly through the media to the public and policymakers.

Insider claimsmaking

Lobbyists and pressure groups go mainly straight to policymakers.

Framing

Tool used by claimsmakers to shape how a problem is understood.

Framing alignment

How activists adjust their frames to recruit potential members.

Bridging

Type of framing alignment that reaches out to people who hold similar frames and support similar causes.

Amplification

Type of framing alignment that calls on widely held values to rally others to the cause.

Extension

Type of framing alignment that enlarges the cause’s frame to encompass wider concerns.

Transformation

Type of framing alignment that calls on people to adopt a new, different frame.

Diagnostic frames

Frames that identify the nature of the troubling condition.

Motivational frames

Frames that discuss why individuals ought to care about the condition.

Prognostic frames

Frames that explain what needs to be done to solve the troubling condition.

Science

An institution designed to test, scrutinize, and revise what we think we know.

Trust

What institutions must earn and maintain from the people who depend on them for expertise to work.

Trust in science is socially constructed

Slide’s point about why people believe scientific expertise.

Medicalization

The increased use of medical language to characterize social problems.

Frequent binge drinking

Example of medicalization: once spoken of as a moral failing, now seen as a disease.

The ‘sick’ role

Individual-level consequence of medicalization.

Poverty

Example of a larger social arrangement that medicalization can shift attention away from.

Medical industrial complex

The domain that medicalization shifts an increasing number of social problems into.

Disease-cure system

The American model that medicalization more generally reinforces.

Media

Plays an important role in how problems are constructed; claimsmakers hope it brings their claims to wider audiences and policymakers.

Media coverage can alter the original claim

The risk claimsmakers face when the media takes up their claim.

Framing shapes meaning without changing facts

Slide’s point about how media framing works.

Transforms events into symbols

What national media coverage often does with events.

Agenda setting

The media’s capability to influence what issues people think about, though there are constraints on their influence.

Feedback

What the media constantly receive and respond to.

Experiential knowledge

Knowledge from patient testimony, Facebook support groups, and embodied pain.

Scientific expertise

Knowledge from clinical trials, peer-reviewed studies, and ‘statistical significance’.

Medical authority

Doctors are culturally positioned as neutral experts, though they are embedded in market systems, attend industry-funded conferences, and rely on manufacturer training.

Gender and credibility

If victims lack credibility, claims struggle to gain traction.

Industry-funded conferences and manufacturer training

Reasons the slides give for questioning doctors’ neutrality (along with being embedded in market systems).

False: they argue that a troubling condition exists; warrants explain why something should be done

True or false: grounds are the part of a claim that explains why something should be done about a social problem.

False: typifying examples are generally not representative

True or false: the typifying examples used in grounds are generally representative of the problem.

False: they add more victims and villains by broadening the definition of the problem

True or false: domain expansion narrows the definition of a problem.

False: that is the objectivist approach; subjectivists focus on people’s perceptions and responses

True or false: the subjectivist approach attempts to measure the characteristics of harmful conditions.

False: framing shapes meaning without changing facts

True or false: framing changes the facts of a case.

False: they target policymakers directly, while outsiders lean on the media

True or false: insider claimsmakers mainly work through the media.