{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010744985673352435, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.236607142857143, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Class and Continuity in Social Reproduction: An Empirical Investigation

The class tradition in the study of social mobility suffers from a number of theoretical and practical weaknesses. In this article we concentrate on the issue of how well the Goldthorpe/CASMIN class schema explains the extent of the social reproduction of advantage when compared with the Cambridge Scale, a continuous measure of occupational and social hierarchy. If classes are to be given any useful meaning, then the groupings involved should be internally relatively homogeneous with respect to a significant criterion of interest to the researcher and there should be relatively clear boundaries between them. In the case of social mobility, the criterion of interest is the ability of the members of one generation to pass on any relative advantage to their successors. Using data from the Nuffield Social Mobility Study, the article examines the relationship between the occupational position of fathers and sons, demonstrating that there is substantial variation within social classes with respect to the reproduction of advantage and that there is no evidence for the existence of boundaries between classes. One consequence is an under-estimation of the extent of reproduction. The findings indicate that the stratification order has to be seen as a continuous hierarchy rather than as a set of distinct classes.