Ebook Understanding China Through Big Data Applications of Theory Oriented Quantitative Approaches Yunsong Chen Online PDF All Chapter
Ebook Understanding China Through Big Data Applications of Theory Oriented Quantitative Approaches Yunsong Chen Online PDF All Chapter
Ebook Understanding China Through Big Data Applications of Theory Oriented Quantitative Approaches Yunsong Chen Online PDF All Chapter
Applications of Theory-oriented
Quantitative Approaches Yunsong
Chen
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/understanding-china-through-big-data-applications-of-
theory-oriented-quantitative-approaches-yunsong-chen/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
https://ebookmeta.com/product/applications-of-big-data-in-
healthcare-theory-and-practice-1st-edition-ashish-khanna-editor/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/omics-approaches-to-understanding-
muscle-biology-1st-edition-yi-wen-chen/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/production-planning-and-control-in-
semiconductor-manufacturing-big-data-analytics-and-
industry-4-0-applications-tin-chih-toly-chen/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/big-data-applications-in-
industry-4-0-1st-edition-p-kaliraj/
Internet Philanthropy in China 1st Edition Chen
https://ebookmeta.com/product/internet-philanthropy-in-china-1st-
edition-chen/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/big-data-and-security-third-
international-conference-icbds-2021-shenzhen-china-yuan-tian/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/primary-mathematics-3a-hoerst/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/social-big-data-analytics-
practices-techniques-and-applications-bilal-abu-salih/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-internet-of-us-knowing-more-
and-understanding-less-in-the-age-of-big-data-michael-patrick-
lynch/
Routledge Advances in Sociology
UNDERSTANDING CHINA
THROUGH BIG DATA
APPLICATIONS OF THEORY-ORIENTED
QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES
Yunsong Chen, Guangye He, and Fei Yan
Understanding China through
Big Data
Chen, He, and Yan present a range of applications of multiple-source big data
to core areas of contemporary sociology, demonstrating how a theory-guided
approach to macrosociology can help to understand social change in China, espe-
cially where traditional approaches are limited by constrained and biased data.
In each chapter of the book, the authors highlight an application of theory-
guided macrosociology that has the potential to reinvigorate an ambitious,
open-minded, and bold approach to sociological research. These include social
stratifcation, social networks, medical care, and online behaviours among many
others. This research approach focuses on macro-level social process and phe-
nomena by using quantitative models to statistically test for associations and
causalities suggested by a clearly hypothesised social theory. By deploying theory-
oriented macrosociology where it can best assure macro-level robustness and reli-
ability, big data applications can be more relevant to and guided by social theory.
An essential read for sociologists with an interest in quantitative and macro-
scale research methods, which also provides fascinating insights into Chinese
society as a demonstration of the utility of its methodology.
PART I
Introduction 1
PART II
Mapping public discourse and social stratifcation 19
PART III
Portraying social transformations and cultural practice 87
References 220
Index 252
Figures
This book, arguably even more than usual, is a product of its times. Far from
being a long gestating project, the volume was conceived unexpectedly and in
haste during the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV or COVID-19)
in early 2020. Like many of our colleagues, Guangye He, Fei Yan, and I found
ourselves living in lockdown conditions at home for months in order to avoid
infection—in downtown Shanghai and in suburban Nanjing. In this sense, the
book is one of the few positive by-products of the global pandemic. At the start of
the outbreak, I was preoccupied with a volunteer project to quantify anti-plague
risks for some 300 major cities in China using multisource big data. As the project
approached its end, I thought about what to do next. The rapidly evolving condi-
tions, particularly in China, gave me a new sense of motivation and urgency to
bring together several China-focused articles using big data and publish them in a
volume that would hopefully be more visible to scholars and policymakers, rather
than hidden in academic journals. I shared my plan and the proposed outline of
the book with both coauthors in a WeChat group one night in January 2020.
Their enthusiastic and immediate responses made it clear that I was not the only
one who felt the need to contribute meaningfully to the public discussions rag-
ing around us. Faced with an onslaught of disease-related news, fake or true, we
felt frustrated, but increasingly determined to harness powerful data to describe,
explain, and even predict social transactions on a macro level in a more robust
way. As we watched in horror as Wuhan and other cities in China were ravaged by
COVID-19, our sense of obligation to make our research useful could never have
been stronger, pushing us to fnish the project at an unheard-of pace.
In this book, we seek to (1) clarify what big data can add to quantitative
sociology in the present day and (2) show what a theory-oriented quantitative
macrosociology looks like by deploying big data to examine a range of social
processes in contemporary China. At the core of theory-oriented quantitative
macrosociology is the quantifcation of key social factors extracted from big data;
these quantifed social factors are then subjected to macro-level theory testing
using conventional model regression. My coauthors and I are interested in how
big data can shift at least part of the focus of quantitative sociology from the
micro level to the macro level, where “bigness” can directly contribute to our
understanding of macro-social processes. For us, big data has powerful potential
Preface xiii
and relevance for social science; used properly, it can link data, theory, and com-
putational methods more robustly and easily, thereby helping sociologists to pro-
vide with the world more powerful arguments and greater infuence. Despite the
advantages and value of this approach, however, big data macrosociology has, by
and large, been ignored by the extant big data literature in social science.
The book is enriched by the collaboration with my coauthors, two diligent and
talented young sociologists with whom I have worked in recent years. Together,
we are committed to demonstrating the value of big data for core sociological
inquires, with special attention to China, where we live and work. Alongside my
coauthors, I would like to extend our appreciation for the productive discussions
we have had with colleagues in China, Europe, and the United States.
First of all, we would like to thank Shuanglong Li, Senhu Wang, Jiankun Liu,
Buwei Chen, Ting Ge, Xiaoshan Lin, and Guodong Ju, who helped to write
some of the chapters and assisted with data cleaning and critical reviews. Special
thanks to Yu Xie, Andrew Walder, Peter Hedström, Michael Biggs, Xiaohong
Zhou, Yanjie Bian, Yi Zhang, and Xiaogang Wu for being wonderful mentors
to all of us. We have had the great fortune to be affliated to several prestigious
academic institutions: the Hopkins Nanjing Center (Nanjing University–Johns
Hopkins University Center for Chinese and American Studies), the Institute of
Analytical Sociology at Linköping University, the Department of Sociology at
Nanjing University, the Department of Sociology at Tsinghua University, The
Shorenstein Asia-Pacifc Research Center at Stanford University, the Chinese
Sociological Association, and the International Chinese Sociology Association.
These institutions have permitted us to focus on this project by providing suf-
fcient time and the most stimulating intellectual environments. Without their
generous support from the outset of this project, this book would never have
been written. The research presented in the book has also appeared in leading
journals including Social Science Research, The China Quarterly, and Urban
Studies, and been supported by generous grants from the National Social Science
Fund of China. Ultimately, however, it is Simon Bates, our amazing editor at
Routledge, who deserves our greatest gratitude for his incredible patience and
support throughout this time. Thank you for helping us get this book to the
fnishing line. By publishing as quickly as we have, we hope that the book will be
able to contribute to some of the most pressing questions and discussions in this
diffcult time.
Yunsong Chen
Nanjing University
Part I
Introduction
1 Bringing big data to
quantitative macrosociology
Introduction
Big data burst onto the scene of social science nearly a decade ago. Coined by
Manovich (2011) to describe datasets too large to be stored and analyzed by
conventional software and personal computers, the term has become a data-sen-
sitive meme in felds as varied as business, sports, journalism, science, and public
health, entailing a near-universal pivot toward data-driven research, business, and
governance (Edelmann et al., 2020; Langlois, Redden & Elmer, 2015; Mayer-
Schönberger & Cukier, 2013; Veltri, 2017). The unprecedented scope and scale
of big data and the variety of qualities—including variety, velocity, volume, and
values—that it can sort in the process of digitally recording the traces of social
transactional activities make it a compelling subject for research into the “social
world” (Kitchin & McArdle, 2016; Savage & Burrows, 2007).
In the feld of sociology, big data brings with it both high expectations and
heated debate. On the one hand, it represents an enormous new source of “digi-
tal footprints” comprising individual actions and social transactions among bil-
lions of people in real and historic time, along with a battery of new approaches
to collect, describe, and analyze them (Halford & Savage, 2017; McFarland,
Lewis & Goldberg, 2016; Watts, 2012). This unprecedented wealth of informa-
tion greatly accelerated expectations for its potential application to social science
research and scholarship, suggesting that the very foundation of empirical studies
in social science would be reconstructed (King, 2014).
Many scholars have pointed to the signifcance of big data in arming soci-
ologists with access to new research resources and opportunities. For example,
Lazer and Radford (2017) summarized fve opportunities that big data can offer
sociologists, namely, accessing meaningful social behavior, monitoring social
phenomena, analyzing data on social systems, providing data for experiments,
and supporting data heterogeneity. Evans and Aceves (2016) surveyed compu-
tational approaches for large-scale analyses on textual data, highlighting the use
of machine learning for theorizing the nature of collective attention, social rela-
tionships, and communication lurking in enormous volumes of archives. Many
robust big data analyses have emerged in recent years, focusing on the applica-
tion of multiple-source big data to diverse topics in core areas of contemporary
4 Big data and quantitative macrosociology
sociology. Overall, as Burrows and Savage (2014, p. 5) pointed out, “sociologists
need to be prepared to intervene in the world of Big Data in order to ensure we
command a voice in this new terrain.”
On the other hand, despite its promise, big data analytics in sociology has
two key limitations. One is that without the theoretically informed and con-
text-driven research that come from domain expertise, the purely computational
approaches of big data analytics can cause research to devolve into speculative
data mining. For sociology, big data applications relying on black-box tools con-
fict with the hermeneutic tradition that is at the core of the discipline (Kitchin,
2014a; Pasquale, 2015).
The other limitation of big data analytics is that despite its size, big data can
still be biased; the agents, applications, and devices producing and collecting the
data can themselves be either selective or manipulated. This points to the paradox
that despite its name, big data is likely to be either “small,” representing only a
subset of social transactions among particular demographics and thereby cap-
turing partial and/or fragmented information (McFarland & McFarland, 2015;
O’Brien, 2016; Park & Macy, 2015; Shaw, 2015); or “artifactual,” whereby
social forces, including censorship, political robots, and system error manipulate
the process of information production, leading to the proliferation of artifacts,
errors, and anomalies (see Lazer & Radford, 2017).
Sociology is now at a crossroads. Although pressured by burgeoning intellec-
tual forces, in particular those harnessing computational approaches and engaging
with big data, sociologists still lack a clear road map leading to effective integra-
tion of big data analytics with contemporary sociology. Their resistance has much
to do with skepticism born of the defciencies in approaches to big data. More
importantly, sociologists need to fnd some mode of study that can lead to some-
thing more than mere fancy analytical tools and exciting results; we need tools
that lead to clear solutions, and we need templates for research that formally link
data, theory, and methodology in more robust, scientifc, and sociological ways.
Put simply, we need to choose precisely where to insert big data into a range of
key facets of empirical sociology—whether it should best be used to portray big
pictures, unveil hidden structures, verify null hypotheses, or infer causality.
The answer is frst to turn back to the data themselves and to ask not what
makes big data exciting, but rather which dimensions of sociology big data is
most aligned with. More precisely, can big data be a kind of macro-data? What is
big data’s advantage when compared with other solutions in sociological inquiry,
such as assembling survey data? In this chapter, we will address these concerns
and show that the empirical strength of big data can be expected to elicit the
emergence of a new type of research that we have so far largely ignored in the
territory of empirical sociology: theory-guided quantitative macrosociology.
For sociology, despite an initial surge of interest and a powerful residual skep-
ticism, big data has been expected to offer insights into each subfeld of the dis-
cipline, not only because each facet of our daily lives has been penetrated in real
time and over time by sophisticated big data apparatuses, but also because the
recorded social environment—the entirety of human behavior, interaction, and
Big data and quantitative macrosociology 5
thought—constitutes a panoramic data repertory that offers us a rare opportunity
to inspect society in an entirely new way. It is important to note that big data is
a composite of myriad transactions of myriad individuals. This reminds us that
despite early claims that the sheer size of big data can attenuate many of its cons
and biases (Mayer-Schönberger & Cukier, 2013), ultimately it is not the size of
big data that matters but the ontological level of information that we can extract
from it. That is, we should critically interrogate available big data to harness its
strength at the macro-level and from a macro-perspective.
Theory-guided quantitative macrosociology has made notable inroads in its
integration of big data in macro-level analysis. This novel approach has the poten-
tial to contribute to sociological studies by exploiting distant reading to get a big
picture of the sizable unread portions of the corpus, which cannot be achieved by
traditional qualitative approaches featuring close reading on selected archives and
quantitative methods defned by model regressions on limited surveyed samples.
The rich spatial and temporal dynamics available through this line of research is
extremely promising.
Conclusion
We are aware that big data approaches alone, just like statistical methods alone,
will not make the most of these data; our call for greater engagement with both
computational technology and sociological expertise, following Halford and
Savage (2017), is based on this awareness. Yet, we also know that neither socio-
logical imagination nor theoretical awareness alone is suffcient for studying social
processes in this digital era of big data. By engaging quantitative macrosociology
and big data aesthetics, we hope to build a credible and robust voice to advocate
for big data analytics. Meanwhile, theory-guided quantitative macrosociology is
certain to allow sociologists to fulfll the promise of big data for sociology with-
out compromising the tradition of and commitment to theoretical imagination,
critical thinking, and rigorous methodology.
Although theory-guided quantitative macrosociology has its limits, it also pro-
vides a feasible path for empirical sociologists to use big data to link theory, data,
and computational approaches in a way that is both convenient and familiar,
and for which researchers have been specifcally trained. Furthermore, we envi-
sion macrosociology as an audacious move into big data and new methods. This
move has ontological and epistemological implications: if we change the source
of information and the tools for analysis, we change the object of knowledge
(Boyd & Crawford, 2012). Such a change makes sociology both more robust
within its social science context and more infuential beyond the academy.
Furthermore, we stress that the unfamiliar and unconventional protocols of
data production inherent in big data analytics cannot be excuses for rejecting
big data. Echoing Halford and Savage (2017), we must resist the tendency to be
complacent and conservative, resting on stale late twentieth-century relationships
between data, method, and theory. Rather, we must recognize that big data is a
18 Big data and quantitative macrosociology
new gateway to a powerful, multidimensional, and multilevel new integration of
theory, data, and method. It is not the bigness of big data that holds its great-
est potential, but rather the unfolding revolution in sociological thinking and
imagination that is unleashed by big data that holds the most promise for new
understandings of social process and context.
Still, we should note that while we confrm the great potential of big data
applications in macrosociology, big data analytic research in the feld is still greatly
hampered by its relative inaccessibility to the very social scientists for whom the
tool would be most useful; in response to big data analytics’ bewildering array of
fast-changing computational technologies and its reliance on non-human appa-
ratuses, these researchers tend to reject the new approach in favor of more con-
ventional methods, such as manually coding small-scale archives or performing
regressions. These barriers have limited big data’s proliferation to a small circle
of scholars able to navigate big data’s complexities. In this regard, one of the
preconditions for acceptance of big data analytics in sociological research is the
lowering of this threshold of accessibility such that even a student with general
training of sociological methodology could utilize it. This obviously involves the
availability of more powerful personal computers, more user-friendly compu-
tational software with extensive analytical tools, and more structured or even
second-hand big data. Finding a middle path between adherence to traditional
approaches to sociological research and adoption of the new resource of big data
is critical.
Part II
Introduction
Since the opening-up reforms of 1978, the vicissitudes of social structure have
introduced numerous challenges and problems, thereby propelling the study of
China’s social stratifcation. During the preliminary stage, researchers focused
on the description and analysis of the objective stratum framework, structural
characteristics, and fow mechanisms (Li, 1993). However, since the late 1990s,
stratum consciousness has become an important area of study. Several scholars
have attempted to further examine the infuence of macro-social structure on
microlevels by reviewing the subjective comments of individuals or groups on
their social and economic status (Chen & Fan, 2015). These studies have thor-
oughly investigated the changing track of China’s social structure, the evolu-
tion of interest relationships, and the underlying structural logic before and after
1978. They have also created a new dimension of research analysis focusing on
social structural changes from the perspective of individual cognition.
However, room remains for the study of social stratifcation from a subjective
perspective. First, due to limited historical data, current literature on stratum
consciousness lacks a panoramic description of social stratum consciousness over
time and has only collectively analyzed individuals’ recent stratum positioning
in market transformation terms. Second, explanations of the changing form and
mechanisms of stratum consciousness mainly derive from individual factors, such
as the objective, relative, and evolving socioeconomic status (SES). Although
some recent literature has begun to debate the association between subjective
strata and income inequality (Chen & Fan, 2016), the discussion of macro-fac-
tors is not full-fedged. Third, previous studies of stratum consciousness have
investigated how individual citizens understand their own and others’ socioeco-
nomic status but have failed to identify the origins of this cognition and how it
emerged as a discourse defning social structure.
In fact, before and after the 1978 opening-up reforms, the nature of China’s
social structure in public discourse had transformed from “class” to “stratum.”
This change not only related to adjustments in China’s political and economic
system but also located a power shift in the discourse of social structure between
state will and conventional wisdom in the context of systemic transformation.
22 Social stratifcation as a public discourse
Although several political scientists have discussed this issue, its signifcance in
the study of social stratifcation has not been fully investigated or verifed with
solid evidence.
This chapter will extend previous studies on stratum consciousness to over-
come this defciency by raising two fundamental questions, both of which we
will review: frst, we explore whether the defnition of social stratifcation in pub-
lic discourse has shifted from “class” to “stratum” since 1949 by asking what
roles the state and the public have played during this shift in discourse from a
historical perspective. Second, we ask what the intrinsic connection is between
the macro-political and economic effects of structural reform and the shift in
discourse about social structure. The academic answers to these questions must
frst guarantee that the analytical data is in scale and well-represented in time and
space. Additionally, the explanatory framework must be optimized based on the
unique societal transformation in China. By interrogating big data using analytic
logic, we answer these questions and offer an explanation based on the Chinese
experience, in order to introduce macro-level cases to the social stratifcation
literature.
Literature review
During the early stage of stratum consciousness studies, researchers attempted to
depict the overall characteristics of stratum structure through individuals’ cog-
nition of their social status. Many empirical studies, whether from developed
countries in Europe and America or from Eastern Europe and South Asia, indi-
cated that most people have a clear consciousness of their “stratum” (Jackman &
Jackman, 1983; Evans & Kelley, 2004; Shirahase, 2010). When asked about the
potential infuence of their social and economic backgrounds, most people tend
to consider themselves as members of the middle class (Evans, Kelley & Kolosi,
1992). However, when studying the stratum consciousness of Chinese people,
domestic scholars found that Chinese stratum positioning is apparently lower
than that of European countries and the United States (Chen & Fan, 2016).
Moreover, there is a greater cognitive discrepancy between people’s objective
social and economic status and their subjective stratum positioning in both urban
and rural areas (Chen & Fan, 2015).
When investigating how the mechanisms underpinning subjective stratum
consciousness form, researchers have produced solid evidence from three per-
spectives. First, an individual’s actual social and economic resources will deci-
sively infuence their cognition of stratum positioning, which is indicated by
different objective status indicators, such as education, income, and occupation
(Hodge & Treiman, 1968). Next, an individual’s stratum positioning is also
affected by subjective factors. For example, a study of Chinese cities indicated
that apart from party membership, educational background, income, housing,
property, and other objective social and economic factors, the sense of equality,
survival anxiety, and social mobility also impact an individual’s stratum identifca-
tion (Weng, 2010; Chen & Fan, 2015). Finally, some macro-factors, including
Social stratifcation as a public discourse 23
income inequality, appear to exert a negative infuence on an individual’s stratum
identifcation (Chen & Fan, 2016).
However, the studies mentioned above remain incomplete. First, the former
analytic target of stratum consciousness study focuses mainly on the individual.
Although experiences and results were derived from a national investigation,
defects in the sample survey make it diffcult to explain to the general public.
Moreover, most domestic scholars in this area have concentrated on post-reform
studies. Their historical analysis spans a brief period of one to ten years; there-
fore, a historical view of either individuals’ or the general public’s stratum con-
sciousness before the reform cannot be verifed. Second, when explaining the
vicissitudes of stratum consciousness, domestic researchers primarily adopt a
micro-theoretical sociological paradigm that emphasizes individual perceptions of
social and economic status, subjective psychology and attitudes, and the function
of comparison with others. However, the repercussions of macro-structural fac-
tors on stratum positioning have been overlooked (Chen & Fan, 2016). Overseas
empirical studies in recent years have indicated that the formation of people’s
stratum consciousness has profound social and economic origins. Certain mac-
roeconomic indicators (GNP and unemployment rate), including the degree of
social inequality and guidance of public opinion, have signifcant impacts on indi-
vidual stratum positioning (Andersen & Curtis, 2012; Curtis, 2015).
Based on this literature review and comments on the history of stratum con-
sciousness, this study conducted subjective social stratifcation research from a
discourse construction perspective. We analyzed the vicissitudes of defnitions
of social structure in public discourse from a macro-historical perspective since
the establishment of the People’s Republic of China. Emphasis was laid on the
signifcant role that state and public attitudes have played in the formation of
social stratifcation discourse against the backdrop of institutional transformation.
Consequently, we can see how opening-up reforms have greatly affected China’s
national development.
Theoretical background
The institutional reforms that began in 1978 pushed China into a new era char-
acterized by dramatic change, and the social structure has diversifed rapidly
accordingly.
First and foremost, the most signifcant fruit of China’s market-oriented trans-
formation has been the stable and high-speed growth of China’s economy for
more than three decades. Due to incentives provided by the macroeconomic
boom and diversifed economic structures, occupational status that stresses the
individual has gradually become the mechanism of social division. Consequently,
access to social and economic resources has widened, leaving the stratum struc-
ture to rapidly divide following the opening-up reforms. This change has not only
led to distinctions in living standards and lifestyles for different strata but also
delimited the public in terms of values and emotions. The most typical example is
the sudden emergence of the middle class after the reform (Zhou, 2002).
24 Social stratifcation as a public discourse
Second, China’s political discourse has also evolved along with the support for
institutional reform and market-oriented transformation. On the one hand, the
state and political life before the reform were run by a system of political mobiliza-
tion constructed by class discourse, meaning most citizens were involved in political
practice. Economy, culture, ideology, and other realms were all affected by politi-
cal guidance, with “class struggle” at the core (Guo, 2003). However, as election
and community self-governance systems were introduced into China’s rural and
urban communities, members of the public were increasingly drawn into politics
(Hu, 2008). On the other hand, the repercussions of the political restructuring of
public ideology have manifested more in changes in the mainstream guidance of
public opinion. Before 1978, class-related social issues were the foundation of the
general public’s daily life (Zhang, 2004). Although China has embraced a new era
of political restructuring since 1978, the transformation of its ideological system
retained the original authoritative system and cultural resources. The guidance of
public opinion during this period was planned and dynamically regulated, in real
time, in accordance with specifc political and economic changes. Consequently,
its direction switched constantly between reform and stability.
Overall, during the period of social transition in China, institutional transfor-
mation can be presumed to have radically altered the methods used to defne the
social structure in public discourse, which is also closely associated with macro-
economic development, income inequality, political involvement, and the guid-
ance of public opinion. This study investigated these issues empirically.
Historical big data were analyzed to illustrate the shifting trajectory of two
defning social stratifcation discourse patterns in Chinese society: class and stra-
tum. We aimed to identify the varying repercussions of state will and public
attitudes on the changing social structure discourse. On that basis, we analyzed
long-term microdata in the context of China’s institutional transformation
to identify the causal connections over time and the macro-structural factors
affecting views of social stratifcation. This was the frst time Chinese social
scientists had conducted an econometric model regression analysis of this issue
using big data.
Class struggle 9.465 12.220 1.291 Social status 0.965 0.433 0.449
Class oppression 0.320 0.334 1.041 Stratum consciousness 0.000 0.001 .1.308
Class status 0.199 0.208 1.045 Social stratifcation 0.000 0.001 1.956
Class line 0.160 0.156 9.767 × 107 Stratum cognition 0.002 0.004 2.521
Class dictatorship 6.947 11.120 1.601 Stratum identifcation 0.001 0.001 1.331
Anti-revolution 86.380 46.260 0.535 Stratum isolation 0.000 0.000 1.894
Revolution 6.220 6.373 1.025 Stratum confict 0.001 0.002 2.238
Rectifcation 7.027 6.308 0.898 Elite class 0.012 0.022 1.835
Left deviation 141.700 103.300 0.7288 Middle class 0.035 0.067 1.907
Right deviation 1.154 0.558 0.484 Poverty class 0.015 0.020 1.321
Proletariat 0.533 0.237 0.445 Executive 0.018 0.022 1.212
Working class 0.153 0.152 0.994 Blue collar 0.009 0.011 1.136
The masses 0.497 0.428 0.862 White collar 0.065 0.083 1.269
Leader 0.585 0.411 0.703 Manager 4.325 3.648 0.843
Right wing 60.330 34.280 0.568 Public servant 1.419 1.620 1.142
Capitalist 3.552 2.418 0.681 Scholar 8.338 5.875 0.705
Landlord 4.328 3.730 0.862 Peasant worker 0.678 1.590 2.346
Rich peasant 0.113 0.057 0.502 Entrepreneur 0.000 0.000 1.654
Poor peasant 0.533 0.408 0.765 Private entrepreneur 0.584 1.152 1.974
Middle peasant 0.276 0.168 0.608 Clerk 1.207 0.585 0.485
Note: The mean value and standard deviation of word frequency ratio is multiplied by a factor of 10,000 for readability.
Social stratifcation as a public discourse 25
26 Social stratifcation as a public discourse
(A Dictionary of Sociology, edited by John Scott and Gordon Marshall) and three
textbooks (Sociology, by Anthony Giddens; History of Foreign Sociology, third
edition, by Jia Chunzeng; and The Summary of the Famous Works on Western
Sociology, by Xie Lizhong). We also included an important investigative report
on social stratifcation (Research Report on Social Stratifcation in Contemporary
China, by Lu Xueyi) and a media source that refected the offcial position of the
state and public opinion (People’s Daily). In Figure 2.1, we present the descriptive
statistics generated by an analysis of vocabulary about different classes and strati-
fcations. As can be seen, some words with Chinese native characteristics (such as
peasant worker) account for much more than professional words (such as stratum
consciousness) in the corpora, which indicates that the selected vocabulary in this
chapter represents the public rather than the academic bias of professional books.
Next, we must emphasize that the focus of our study was the change in class
and stratum discourse before and since reform. Therefore, we paid special atten-
tion to vocabulary that indicated dramatic changes in the stratifcation structure
during those periods. For example, during rural economic reform and urbaniza-
tion, peasant workers emerged in large numbers in Chinese society as a historical,
post-reform phenomenon. Moreover, these stratum words were highly repre-
sentative, not only because they were frequently and repeatedly used in our four
vocabulary sources (professional dictionary, textbooks, professional investigation
reports, and news press), but also because they comprised the basic characteristics
Component 1 Component 2
Results
(I) Historical vicissitudes of class and stratum in public discourse
(1949–2008)
We calculated the total value of the annual word frequency ratio in class- and stra-
tum-related vocabulary. The totaling of original word frequency (Figure 2.2, left)
and the standardized value of total word frequency (Figure 2.2, right) both indi-
cated that class-related vocabulary rose rapidly from 1949 to 1976 but plunged
soon after. Then, the trajectory of stratum-related vocabulary steadily grew after
1978. We can see in Figure 2.2 (right) that by the end of the 1950s, the total
proportion of class-related vocabulary increased rapidly in books, reaching a peak
in the mid-1970s, while stratum-related vocabulary bottomed out over the same
period. Since the 1980s, the status of these book vocabularies reversed. It is
noteworthy that in the twenty-frst century, especially since 2002, the attention
paid to stratum issues has jumped.3 Some specifc stratum defnitions—scholar,
peasant worker, executive, white collar, and public servant—have shown dramatic
growth.
These results may answer the frst question at the beginning of this chapter,
which is that from 1949 to 2008, the defnition of social stratifcation in China’s
public discourse has transformed signifcantly from class to stratum, refecting the
weakening of the state will in shaping and controlling the discursive system. The
public’s needs and attitudes have become a more important force in the construc-
tion of new discourse. To be specifc, defnitions of social structure in Chinese
public discourse since 1949 indicate that class-related discourse before reform
refected the powerful position of offcial ideology, while the shift to stratum after
reform indicated that public attitudes had become the main driver of discourse
Figure 2.2 The total value of the annual word frequency ratio in class- and stratum-
related vocabulary. Solid line: class; dotted line: stratum.
30 Social stratifcation as a public discourse
construction. Moreover, this transformation has been highly associated with the
critical historical event of opening-up reforms of 1978. Nevertheless, this descrip-
tion is of no empirical signifcance.
Next, we aimed to verify the rules by which macro-changes functioned.
1) The change in GDPcp, GINI, and PDI can all be explained by the time-
sequenced change in LC (p < 0.05). Since these variables were included in
the model in the form of initial differences, the growth in GDP since the
previous year, the increase in income inequality, and the rise of public politi-
cal participation all could explain the growth in public attention to stratum
over the following year.
2) In terms of statistical signifcance, the infuence of income inequality (GINI)
on public LC (p < 0.01) was apparently greater than macroeconomic devel-
opment (GDPcp) (p < 0.05).
[98]
HORIZONTAL
Phrygian
1 shepherd Move 78
changed into a fir tree Dissipate
79
God of5 love Pert.81
to the eyes
Parched
9 Federations
83 of workers
Domesticates
12 Hostelries
86
Unusual
17 A lizard
87
Was18 contiguous Unit 89
Kind19of compass used Propeller
90
in surveying A pledge
92
Considerable
20 in degree Past93
Rounded
22 protuberance One94 who compiles
A drop
23 of saline fluid material for publication
Domestic
25 animal Placed
96 at intervals
Indian
26tribe Japanese
99 plant
To inspire
27 deep Implore
100
reverence Barrier
102
Bordered
29 Abaft
104
Exist31 Tree105
Small33mound of earth Males
107
Goddess
34 of the moon Well-being
109
Receptacle
37 for ashes Wrath
112
Grecian
38 sub-prefect Phœnician
114 princess
Obtain
40 carried away by Zeus
Make 41less bitter Bronze
116 or copper
Overmuch
44 Tottered
117
Pore46over Watering
121 place
One47 International
123 language
Part 48
of a circle Broke
124
A small
50 hole Tiny
126
Ventilate
53 Sharp-pointed
127 tool
Groups55 of three Vedic
129god of the sun
Trial58impression Not131
good
Loose 60end Persia
133
Web-footed,
62 tailless Pert.
135 to national sea
amphibian forces
Minor 64devil Sea137eagle
Seaman65 Brittle,
138 salty biscuit
To be 67obliged for Languish
139
Certain
68 Irascible
140
In the69direction of Be 141
conscious of
Writer71of a kind of Those
142 snaky fish
plaintive verse A donkey
143
To seek
74 something
lofty
Floating
76 vegetation in
the Nile
Vapid 77
VERTICAL
Hundred-eyed
1 son of Once66more
Zeus A small
68 shoot or twig
Acid 2 Regret
70
Instruments
3 for Edge72
preserving the form of A high
73 wave
shoes Wickedness
75
An affirmative
4 The 79
moon
Took its
6 way One80who meanly
Wind 7instrument admires wealth or
Quiet 8 social position
Heedful
9 One81of a tribe of
Long,10slender plant Algonquin Indians
Mountain
11 near ancient Idler82
Troy Solemn84 affirmation
Flurry
13 To shut
85 close
Merriment
14 Falsehood
88
Comfort
15 Deed 91
Smooth
16 A nymph
94 who was
Ancient
21 coin mentioned changed into a fountain
in the Bible Metal-bearing
95 rock
Immediate
22 knowledge Equality
97 as to value
Tap 24 Make 98less light
The 25
brave That101overworked
Saturated
28 Australian bird
Enlarged
30 The103southwest wind
Rodent
32 The106papal court
Essential
35 self The108land where the
Elude36 sandman lives
To implant
38 deeply The110bay tree
Demure
39 A judicial
111 inquest
Marry42 To chill
112
A discriminating
43 sense A piece
113 of property
of hearing Merits
114
Imbecile
45 An 115
effervescent drink
Expression
46 of Possess
118
exaltation A king
119 of Israel
Intention
47 A narrow
120 passage
A female
49 quadruped Unadulterated
122
Case51for small articles A tiresome
124 person
A kind
52 of molding A large
125 plant
Smoothing
54 Staff
128
Full 56
of perforations Still130
Person
57 with a powerful Open132
voice Total
134
Noblemen
58 of high rank Imitate
136
A marked
59
characteristic
To adjust
61
Pants
63
[101]
[Contents]
Puzzle No. 94
LITTLE BUT A BAD ’UN
By Frank C. White
[100]
HORIZONTAL
Original
1 man of Horus An exclamation
30 of
The first
6 Jewish high surprise
priest Leisurely
31 (obs.)
A genus
11 of Am. plants Any 34
sirenian, esp. the
A member
13 of the Creek rytina
Indian tribe A pliable
37 strip of oxhide
Metal 15for casting in (So. Africa)
pigs Contrary
38 to good in a
A game17 played for moral sense
stakes A recess
40 in the shore
A valley
18 in N. W. Anything
41 steeped in
Argolis liquid
Sooner20 than A wind
42 (musical)
Track 21of a deer instrument
One23 of a tribe of A fairy
44 queen
Algonquians A genus
45 of No. Am.
In the24thing or herbs
individual A cloud
47
Permit25 (3rd per. sing.) Reprinting
49 and
(pl.) publishing of a work
A workman
27 on shoes Lamellirostral
50 birds
Denoting
29 the infinitive Am. 51
wild plums
VERTICAL
Tutor 2 Son 24
of Abraham and
A garden
3 implement Sarah (Bib.)
Monitor
4 lizard Sorrow
26
Restores
5 to existence A beverage
28
Invoke6 Burning
31
An Eastern
7 continent Be present
32 (obs. var.)
To clothe
8 in an odd Long33speech
manner
Mien 9 Slope 34(3rd per. sing.)
A town
10 in Oklahoma (pl.)
To insinuate
12 contempt Common35 (obs. var.)
Light14repast A German
36 philosopher
Absence
16 of removal Abbr.39Life Guards
(rare) Compounds
42 containing
Objective
19 case of I metal
Natural
22 kind or class, An English
43
esp. of animals mathematician
A word46 of command in
driving animals
Hoot48
[103]
[Contents]
Puzzle No. 95
MODERATION
By Porter R. Lee
[102]
HORIZONTAL
Snake1 Country
40 in N. America
Rainy4 Legendary
41 king
Make9hum by spinning Legal42science
Russian
12 money Cause44 of anything
Steep
13 Set again
45
Fat 14 Son 47
of Odin
Notable
15 period Something
49 to follow
For instance
16 Secondary
51
Toward
18 A root
53
Mend19 Sound54
Confronted
20 In such
55 circumstances
Lariat
22 Atop57
Speck
23 You 59
and I
Pasturage
25 Torn60piece
Impair
27 Unripe
62
Public
30passages Ventilate
63
Raves
32 Product
65 of digestion
Layer
35 Slippery
66 fish
Length
36 of the forearm Bearing
67 buds
Member
39 of cat family Influenced
68
VERTICAL
[105]
[Contents]
Puzzle No. 96
JUST FOR TWO!
By Charley Cinderclass and Stoney Lonesome
[104]
HORIZONTAL
Tatter1 Squeeze
60
Dressed,
3 as a stone Planet
61
A color
7 Silicate
62 of magnesia
Guided
11 Note63
State13 Battering
65 engine
Danger
14 Chinese
67 coin
Murmur
15 Voter69
Jutting
16 rock Earthwork
71
Weird18 Newness
73
Select
20 set Invisible
75 fluid
Fortify
22 Dromedary
76
Jejune
24 Meadow
78
Stranded
25 Grain79
Single
27 Java82pepper
Game 28at cards Cleanser
84
Cone 29bearing tree Iniquity
86
Scrutinize
30 Bark88
Cereal
32 grain Vassal
89
Craft34 Exclude
91
Mercenary
35 Trick92
Mohammedan
37 religion Disturbance
93
Foxy39 Become
94 acclivitous
Winnow
40 Protrude
97
Darns41 Roadhouse
98
Racing
43 boat Lance99
Rhythm
45 Extreme
101
Also49 Sore104
Six angled
50 figure Bond106
Throw53 A relative
107
Wander
54 Wing-shaped
108
Cad 56 Edible
109 tuber
Desire
57 Toughen
110
Rake58 Hydrocarbon—radical
111
Plunder
59 At a112
distance
VERTICAL
[107]
[Contents]
Puzzle No. 97
A CRISS CROSS
By Jack Barrett
[106]
HORIZONTAL
A play1 A rule
58
Certify6 Ceremony
59
A dandy
11 Away 60from
Tackle12 A strong
63 horse
A state
14 Distant
66
To content
15 Luminary
68
Melodies
17 A stipulation
69
Combination
19 of things Vigilant
71
Exposes
21 Affirmative
73
Cover 23 Sidle75
Reproachful
25 Destroy
77
expression Stay78
Sincere
26 Observe
79
An ancestor
28 Ourselves
80
Later29 Ravishes
81
Loiters
31 Mercenary
83
From32 Pair 85
(abbr.)
Rates 34 Finished
86
Window36 Annoy87
Upon 38 Passenger
91 car
Sprightly
39 Deduces
93
A jot41 Constituent
96 of soap
Continent
43 Part 97
Man’s 44name Smooth
99 fabric
A stamp
46 Generous
100
Scorches
47 Conceals
103
Obtuse48 Make104of auto
Mexican
50 gum tree Sharp
105
End 51 Floating
106 ice
Siesta53 Propeller
108
Inquire
54 Derisive
109 expressions
Rabbit55 Clothes
110 protectors
A title
57