高度现实的愿望——规范的压力会推翻理性的计算吗?将框架选择模型应用于德国移民和多数学生的教育愿望

IF 1.3 4区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY
Miriam Schmaus, Melanie Olczyk, Sebastian Neumeyer, Gisela Will
{"title":"高度现实的愿望——规范的压力会推翻理性的计算吗?将框架选择模型应用于德国移民和多数学生的教育愿望","authors":"Miriam Schmaus, Melanie Olczyk, Sebastian Neumeyer, Gisela Will","doi":"10.1177/10434631231208989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Educational aspirations are of interest to scholars in several disciplines. They can affect multiple aspects of educational success and have been shown to differ between major social groups. Explanations for educational aspirations typically link to two main models of aspiration formation: the Wisconsin model (WM) and rational choice theory (RCT). Whereas the WM highlights significant others’ educational norms, RCT cites cost-benefit calculations to explain how aspirations are formed. As it is still unclear how the two approaches interrelate, we apply a third model, namely the model of frame selection (MFS), which allows the integration of both WM and RCT arguments. In short, it suggests that the importance of others’ educational norms moderates the relevance of own cost-benefit calculations. We assume that considering this interrelation is fruitful when explaining aspirations in general, and specifically when explaining immigrant students’ aspirations, who often perceive high educational obligations by their parents. Using data from the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), we test prognoses derived from the three theoretical models for their relevance when explaining the aspirations of Turkish and German students. Results indicate that the processes suggested by both WM and RCT shape aspirations. Consistent with the MFS, these processes also interrelate in that parents’ educational norms reduce the relevance of students’ own cost-benefit calculations. This interrelation does not only apply to Turkish students but holds for all students in the sample.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"105 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"High realistic aspirations – Do normative pressures overthrow rational calculations? Applying the model of frame selection to the educational aspirations of immigrant and majority students in Germany\",\"authors\":\"Miriam Schmaus, Melanie Olczyk, Sebastian Neumeyer, Gisela Will\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10434631231208989\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Educational aspirations are of interest to scholars in several disciplines. They can affect multiple aspects of educational success and have been shown to differ between major social groups. Explanations for educational aspirations typically link to two main models of aspiration formation: the Wisconsin model (WM) and rational choice theory (RCT). Whereas the WM highlights significant others’ educational norms, RCT cites cost-benefit calculations to explain how aspirations are formed. As it is still unclear how the two approaches interrelate, we apply a third model, namely the model of frame selection (MFS), which allows the integration of both WM and RCT arguments. In short, it suggests that the importance of others’ educational norms moderates the relevance of own cost-benefit calculations. We assume that considering this interrelation is fruitful when explaining aspirations in general, and specifically when explaining immigrant students’ aspirations, who often perceive high educational obligations by their parents. Using data from the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), we test prognoses derived from the three theoretical models for their relevance when explaining the aspirations of Turkish and German students. Results indicate that the processes suggested by both WM and RCT shape aspirations. Consistent with the MFS, these processes also interrelate in that parents’ educational norms reduce the relevance of students’ own cost-benefit calculations. This interrelation does not only apply to Turkish students but holds for all students in the sample.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rationality and Society\",\"volume\":\"105 4\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rationality and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631231208989\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rationality and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631231208989","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

教育志向是几个学科的学者感兴趣的问题。它们可以影响教育成功的多个方面,并且在主要社会群体之间表现出差异。对教育愿望的解释通常与愿望形成的两个主要模型有关:威斯康星模型(WM)和理性选择理论(RCT)。WM强调重要他人的教育规范,而RCT则引用成本效益计算来解释愿望是如何形成的。由于目前还不清楚这两种方法是如何相互关联的,我们应用了第三种模型,即框架选择模型(MFS),它允许WM和RCT参数的集成。简而言之,它表明他人教育规范的重要性调节了自身成本效益计算的相关性。我们假设考虑这种相互关系在解释一般的愿望时是富有成效的,特别是在解释移民学生的愿望时,他们通常认为父母有很高的教育义务。使用来自德国国家教育小组研究(NEPS)的数据,我们测试了三个理论模型在解释土耳其和德国学生的愿望时的相关性。结果表明,WM和RCT建议的过程都塑造了愿望。与MFS一致,这些过程也相互关联,因为父母的教育规范降低了学生自己的成本效益计算的相关性。这种相互关系不仅适用于土耳其学生,而且适用于样本中的所有学生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
High realistic aspirations – Do normative pressures overthrow rational calculations? Applying the model of frame selection to the educational aspirations of immigrant and majority students in Germany
Educational aspirations are of interest to scholars in several disciplines. They can affect multiple aspects of educational success and have been shown to differ between major social groups. Explanations for educational aspirations typically link to two main models of aspiration formation: the Wisconsin model (WM) and rational choice theory (RCT). Whereas the WM highlights significant others’ educational norms, RCT cites cost-benefit calculations to explain how aspirations are formed. As it is still unclear how the two approaches interrelate, we apply a third model, namely the model of frame selection (MFS), which allows the integration of both WM and RCT arguments. In short, it suggests that the importance of others’ educational norms moderates the relevance of own cost-benefit calculations. We assume that considering this interrelation is fruitful when explaining aspirations in general, and specifically when explaining immigrant students’ aspirations, who often perceive high educational obligations by their parents. Using data from the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), we test prognoses derived from the three theoretical models for their relevance when explaining the aspirations of Turkish and German students. Results indicate that the processes suggested by both WM and RCT shape aspirations. Consistent with the MFS, these processes also interrelate in that parents’ educational norms reduce the relevance of students’ own cost-benefit calculations. This interrelation does not only apply to Turkish students but holds for all students in the sample.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Rationality & Society focuses on the growing contributions of rational-action based theory, and the questions and controversies surrounding this growth. Why Choose Rationality and Society? The trend toward ever-greater specialization in many areas of intellectual life has lead to fragmentation that deprives scholars of the ability to communicate even in closely adjoining fields. The emergence of the rational action paradigm as the inter-lingua of the social sciences is a remarkable exception to this trend. It is the one paradigm that offers the promise of bringing greater theoretical unity across disciplines such as economics, sociology, political science, cognitive psychology, moral philosophy and law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信