后合法社会

IF 1.4 3区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
William Charles, Ryan Gunderson
{"title":"后合法社会","authors":"William Charles, Ryan Gunderson","doi":"10.1111/jtsb.12428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We explore the role of moral, cognitive, and pragmatic legitimacy in reproducing the organization of two on‐demand labor platforms for couriers. Labor platforms are ideal cases to explore questions of legitimacy and institutional reproduction because they aspire towards automaticity. Since the 1970s, with the emergence of new production technologies and organizational forms, labor and work scholars have predicted a shift from the use of direct, coercive controls as a method to coordinate activity to more indirect, hegemonic, and normative methods of control. However, we find that in the case of the gig economy, platform firms are refuting the predictions of Post‐Fordist labor scholars, relying upon new forms of direct technological control as well as coercive, indirect market control, as opposed to shared norms and obligations, as methods for coordinating activity. We explore the implications of ‘post‐legitimate’ institutions, as well as the latent moral economy of gig workers as revealed through their critiques of the platform economy.","PeriodicalId":47646,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Post‐Legitimate Society\",\"authors\":\"William Charles, Ryan Gunderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jtsb.12428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We explore the role of moral, cognitive, and pragmatic legitimacy in reproducing the organization of two on‐demand labor platforms for couriers. Labor platforms are ideal cases to explore questions of legitimacy and institutional reproduction because they aspire towards automaticity. Since the 1970s, with the emergence of new production technologies and organizational forms, labor and work scholars have predicted a shift from the use of direct, coercive controls as a method to coordinate activity to more indirect, hegemonic, and normative methods of control. However, we find that in the case of the gig economy, platform firms are refuting the predictions of Post‐Fordist labor scholars, relying upon new forms of direct technological control as well as coercive, indirect market control, as opposed to shared norms and obligations, as methods for coordinating activity. We explore the implications of ‘post‐legitimate’ institutions, as well as the latent moral economy of gig workers as revealed through their critiques of the platform economy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12428\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12428","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们探讨了道德、认知和实用合法性在复制两个按需快递员劳动平台组织中的作用。劳务平台是探讨合法性和制度再生产问题的理想案例,因为它们渴望实现自动化。自 20 世纪 70 年代以来,随着新的生产技术和组织形式的出现,劳动和工作学者们预测,作为协调活动的一种方法,将从使用直接的、强制性的控制转向更间接的、霸权的和规范性的控制方法。然而,我们发现,在 "打工经济 "的案例中,平台公司正在反驳 "后福特主义 "劳动学者的预测,它们依赖于新形式的直接技术控制以及胁迫性的间接市场控制,而不是共享规范和义务,作为协调活动的方法。我们将探讨 "后合法 "机构的影响,以及通过对平台经济的批评所揭示的临时工潜在的道德经济。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Post‐Legitimate Society
We explore the role of moral, cognitive, and pragmatic legitimacy in reproducing the organization of two on‐demand labor platforms for couriers. Labor platforms are ideal cases to explore questions of legitimacy and institutional reproduction because they aspire towards automaticity. Since the 1970s, with the emergence of new production technologies and organizational forms, labor and work scholars have predicted a shift from the use of direct, coercive controls as a method to coordinate activity to more indirect, hegemonic, and normative methods of control. However, we find that in the case of the gig economy, platform firms are refuting the predictions of Post‐Fordist labor scholars, relying upon new forms of direct technological control as well as coercive, indirect market control, as opposed to shared norms and obligations, as methods for coordinating activity. We explore the implications of ‘post‐legitimate’ institutions, as well as the latent moral economy of gig workers as revealed through their critiques of the platform economy.
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
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour publishes original theoretical and methodological articles that examine the links between social structures and human agency embedded in behavioural practices. The Journal is truly unique in focusing first and foremost on social behaviour, over and above any disciplinary or local framing of such behaviour. In so doing, it embraces a range of theoretical orientations and, by requiring authors to write for a wide audience, the Journal is distinctively interdisciplinary and accessible to readers world-wide in the fields of psychology, sociology and philosophy.
×
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