Middle Range Theory-RK Merton
Broadly there are two view-points or methodology for formulating sociological theory:
(I) Macro-approach, and
(ii) Micro-approach.
The first approach involves extensive study on the basis of a larger size of the “universe”, or the units of study; while the second approach involves intensive study on the basis of very limited size of the “universe”, or the units of study. That is why, Don Martindale has observed that “this distinction between macro and micro approaches is made purely in terms of size of the unit chosen as the basic type of system for the branch of the theory in question.” More clearly, in macro-approach, a wide universe or a macro-sociological problem or social phenomenon, is chosen for study and on the basis of an extensive Study a theory is formulated; on the other hand, in micro-approach a smaller size of the unit is selected and a study is conducted very intensively and a theory formulated. Thus, the theories formulated on the basis of macro-study and micro-study are the two extremes of sociological theories. Middle-range theories occupy a middle position between these two extremes. In other words, middle range theories are neither “all embracing” in nature involving total system, nor a “common sense theory” based on very limited study. It is realized that in too extensive and all-embracing studies, we can hardly do justice to our subject. It is usually unmanageable. Similarly, in too limited studies, exact conclusions can hardly be achieved. Hence, a middle approach in between these two extremes is needed.
What is Middle-Range Theory?
The main exponent of this approach is Robert K. Merton. He developed his point of view in his book “Social Theory and Social Structure”. According to him, the theories of the middle-range are those theories “that lie between the minor but necessary working hypotheses that evolve in abundance during day to-day research and the all-inclusive systematic efforts to develop an Unified theory that will explain, all the observed uniformities of social behaviour, social organization and social change.” More clearly, a Middle-Range theories is neither so minor as a day-to-day working hypothesis nor so extensive which could explain everything. It occupy a position in between “very particular” and “very general” theories or between” very few and “all” of the observed facts of social behaviour, social organization and social change.
Nature and uses of Middle-Range Theories
Merton has maintained that middle-range theory is practically used in sociology to guide empirical inquiry. It is “intermediate, on the one hand, to general theories of social systems which are too remote from particular classes of social behaviour, organization and change to account for what is observed and, on the other hand, to those detailed orderly descriptions of particulars that are not generalized at all.
Again, according to Merton, middle-range theory involves abstractions, of course, but they are close enough to observe data to be incorporated in propositions that permit empirical testing. As it is evident from its very name, “middle-range theories deal with delimited aspects of social phenomena, as is indicated by their labels.” That is to say, it does not at a time take into consideration all the types of social behaviour, social organization and social change, but only relates itself to certain definite and limited aspects of a social phenomenon and draws conclusion on the bas is of empirical study. For example, a sociologist speaks of a theory of reference groups, of social mobility or role-conflict just as a natural scientist speaks of a theory of gravitation or a germ theory of disease.
Merton, by citing a few examples, has characteristically explained the nature of middle-range theories. Gilbert on magnetism, Boyle on atmospheric pressure, or Darwin on the formation of coral atolls, respectively, begins with the relatively simple idea that the cart may be conceived as a magnet, with the simple idea that the atmosphere may be conceived as a ‘sea of air’, or atolls considered upward or outward growth of coral over islands long subsided into the sea. Each theory provides an image giving rise to inferences. Taking Boyle’s case of atmospheric pressure, Merton asserts that the initial idea thus suggests specific hypothesis which are tested by seeing whether the inferences from them are empirically confirmed. The idea itself tested for its fruitfulness by noting the range of theoretical problems and hypotheses Similarly, in the field of sociological studies we may take the example of the theory of reference groups and relative deprivation. It starts with the simple idea, initiated by James, Baldwin, and Mad, and developed by layman and Stouffer, that people tend to adopt the standards of “significant others” as a basis of self-appraisal and evaluation. Common sense would suggest that the greater the actual loss experienced by a family in a mass disaster, the more acutely it will feel deprived. But the theory of relative deprivation leads to quite a different hypothesis-which self-appraisals depend upon people’s comparisons of their own situation with that of other people. This theory, therefore, suggests that families suffering serious losses will feel less deprived than those suffering smaller losses if they are in situations leading them to compare themselves to people suffering even more severe losses. Empirical inquiry supports the theory of relative deprivation rather than the common-sense assumptions. The empirically tested conclusion can thus be put simply, as follows: “When few are hurt too much the same extent, the pain and loss of each seems great; where many are hurt in greatly varying degree, even fairly large losses seem small as they are compared with far larger ones range theory. This is middle range theory.
Merton has pointed out that “it is equally clear that such middle-range theories are not logically derived from a single all-embracing theory of social systems, though once developed they may be consistent with one. More, each theory is more than a mere proposition summarizing observed uniformities of relationships between two or more variables. That is middle-range theories concern themselves with more or less restricted field of social behaviour, social organization or social change. Merton observes that those who insist for all embracing unified sociological theories, forget the fact that evicts, etc., this tendency has been given up and there also attention is concentrated on restricted fields. The great physicist Albert Einstein observed: “The greater part of physical research is devoted to the development of the various branches in Physics, in each of which the object is the theoretical understanding of more or less restricted fields of experience, and in each of which the laws and concepts remain as closely as possible related to experience.”
Therefore, “our major task to-day is to develop special theories applicable to limited conceptual ranges-theories, for example, of deviant behaviour, reference groups, social control, etc. rather than to sick immediately the total conceptual structure.”
In Support of Middle-Range Theories
Merton has cited many ancient and modern scholars who have supported the policy of middies-range theory. For example, Plato observed: That Particulars are infinite, and the higher generalities give no sufficient direction: and that the pith of all sciences, which makes the arts man differ from the inexpert, is in the middle propositions, which in every particular knowledge are taken from tradition and experience.” Frank Hawkins concludes that “middle range theories seem likely to have greater explicative significance than total sociological theories.” Durkheim’s monograph, ‘Suicide’, is perhaps the classical instance of the use and development of middle range theory. Sorokin recommends theories of intermediate range as guides to sociological inquiry, although he continues to prefer, for himself, the quest for a system of general sociology.
Criticism or Rejection of Middle-Range Theory
Few have rejected the idea of middle-range theory with more eloquence than Robert Bierstadt, when he writes: We have even been invited to forego those larger problems of human society that occupied history of social thought and to seek instead what T.H. Marshall called “stepping stones in the middle distance, and other sociologists, since theories of middle range.” But what an anaemic ambition this is ! Shall we strive for half victory ?”
To this criticism, Merton’s answer is that Bierstadt has himself admitted that “in my own opinion one of the greatest pieces of sociological research even conducted by any one is Max Weber’s Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. For surely, says Merton, this monograph is a prime example of theorizing in the middy le-range; it deals with a severely delimited problem-one that happens to be exemplified in a particular historical epoch with implications for other societies and other times; it employs a limited theory about the ways in which religious commitment and economic behaviour are connected; and it contributes to a so eight more general theory of the modes of inter-dependency between social institutions.
Another criticism holds that theories of middle-range splinter the field of Sociology into unrelated special theories. Merton admits that tendencies towards fragmentation in Sociology have indeed developed, but this is scarcely a result of working towards theories of intermediate scope. On the contrary, Theories of middle-range consolidate, not fragment, empirical findings.
Summary
- Middle-range theories consist of limited sets of assumptions from which specific hypothesis are logically derived and confirmed by empirical investigation.
2 these theories do not remain separate, but are consolidated into wider networks of theory.
- These theories are sufficiently abstract to deal with differing spheres of social behaviour and social structure, so that they transcend sheer description or empirical generalization.
4 This type of theory cuts across the distinction between micro-sociological problems, as evidenced in small group research, and macro-sociological problems. As evidenced in comparative studies of social organization.
- Marx historical materialism, Parson’s Theory of Social Systems, and Sorokin’s immoral sociology falling in the category of total sociological ends represent general theoretical orientations.
6 many theories of middle-range are consonant with various systems of sociological thought.
7 Middle-nine theories are in direct line with the work of classical theorem cal formulations. Wearer residuary legatees of Durkheim and Weber, who famish ideas, exemplify tactics of theorizing. Providing models for the exercise of his tastes in selecting problems and raise resultant theoretical questions.
- middle- range orientation specifies ignorance. It expressly recognize that be lamed to lathe foundation for still more knowledge. Further. It addresses itself to those problems that may be clarified in the light of available knowledge.
Middle range theories are abstract in nature and are connected to empirical reality. They are involved in the research so that concepts can be clarified and a general theoretical orientation would be reformulated. In middle range theories, “the concepts and propositions of sociological theory will become more tightly organised as theoretically focused empirical research forces clarification, elaboration, and reformulation of the concepts and propositions of each middle-range theory.”
“Sociological Theories of the Middle Range” is the second of the five essays in Merton’s book Social Theory and Social Structure. Merton makes a statement on this book, Throughout this book, the term sociological theory refers to logically interconnected sets of Propositions from which empirical uniformities can be derived in is way, Marlon emphasized on that theorists must invest their energies in the construction of limited number of theories based on research. Theorists must also be concerned with “consolidating the special theories into a more general set of concepts and usually consistent propositions” The special theories of sociology not
Therefore be formulated on making concentrated effort what they can after more general sociological theorising,
Theories of the middle range, according to Merton, would be discussed in any event. They are “theories that lie between the minor but necessary working hypotheses that evolve in abundance during day-to-day research and the all-inclusive systematic efforts to develop a unified theory that will explain all the observed uniformities of social behaviour, social organisation and social change.”
Thus, theories of the middle range involve in the description of social phenomena, In Merton’s view, middle-range theories would be able to provide a general theoretical orientation toward social phenomena. Middle range theory is used in sociology to guide empirical reality Theory of reference group, the theory of relative deprivation, and Merton’s own theory of the role-set are some of the examples of the use of middle-range theories. These theories are quite different from those all-embracing total systems of sociological theory. Merton rightly points out about middle range theory as follows:
It is intermediate to general theories of social systems which are too remote from particular classes of social behaviour, organisation and change to account for what is observed and to those detailed orderly descriptions of particulars that are not generalised at all. Middle range theory involves abstractions, of course, but they are close enough to observed data to be incorporated in propositions that permit empirical testing. Middle-range theories deal with delimited aspects of social phenomena.
Merton’s theory of middle range, in fact, is primarily concerned with-
(I) a guide to empirical inquiry;
(ii) intermediate between general and particular theories of social system,
(iii) abstractions that permits empirical testing, and
(iv) delimited aspects of social phenomena.
Theory of middle-range is not a new theory, it has swellstablished roots. This theory has been supported directly or indirectly by Bacon, Plato, and Mill, and also some sociologists such as Hawkins, Ginsberg. Mannheim, and Sorokin. Bacon emphasized indirectly the prime importance of “middle axioms” in science as follows:
The understanding must not however be allowed to jump and fly trom particulars to temote axioms and of almost the highest generality (such as the first principles as they are called, of arts and things), and taking stand upon them as truth that cannot be shaken, portend to prove and tram the middle axioms by reference to them; which has been the practice hitherto; the understanding being not only citied that way by a natural impulse but also by the use of syllogistic demonstration trained and inured to it. But then, and then only, may we hope well to the sciences, when in a just scale of ascent, and by successive steps not interrupted or broken, we rise from particulars to lesser axioms; and to middle axioms, one above the other; and last of all to the most general. For the lowest axioms differ but slightly from bare experience, while the biggest and most general (which we now have) are notional and abstract and without solidity But the middle are the truce and solid and living axioms, on which depend the affairs and fortunes of men; and above them, 1ast of all, those which are indeed the most general: such I mean as are not abstract, but of which those intermediate axioms are really limitations.
John Stuart Mill and George Cornwall Lewis have supported Bacon’s view on “middle principles”. Lewis draws upon Bacon to make a case for “limited theories” in political science. Lewis argues that limited theories involves in the prediction of general tendencies and prevailing laws of causation by the methods of observation of limited class of communities. On the other, sociologists such as Karl Mannheim, Adolf Lowe and Morris Ginsberg put forth concepts of “principia media”, “sociological middle principles” and “Mills treatment of middle principles in social science” respectively.
On the relevance of middle range theory, Frank Hawkins concludes that:
Middle-range theories seem likely… to have the greater explicative significance (than total sociological theories). Here much has been done relating to mass communication, class stratification, bureaucracy, small groups of various types, and other important aspects of the social totality.”
Middle-range theory has got an important place in sociology Insofar as the empirical relevance is concerned. As Arthur K. Davis states “theories of the ‘middle range’ in contrast to liaisons’ more comprehensive approach, was well conceived…. A middle-range focus-empirical analysis in a limited conceptual setting-appears to assure more securely the necessary continuous contact with empirical variables”. Peter H. Rossi, and another advocator of empirical research, point out, “The conception of “theories of the middle range” achieved wide popularity both among sociologists primarily oriented to research and among those concerned with theory.”1
In addition, Durkheim’s monograph, Suicide, has a major contribution in the development of middle-range theory. To demonstrate Durkheim’s approach and clarify what “middle range” theory is about Merton restated Durkheim this way:
- Social cohesion provides psychic support to group members subjected to acute stresses and anxieties.
- Suicide rates are functions of unrelieved anxieties and stresses to which persons are subjected.
- Catholics have greater social cohesion than Protestants.
- Therefore, lower suicide rates should be anticipated among Merton takes his position on Durkheim’s analysis of suicide in theory of middle-range because of empirical verification by further defining and operational sing his concepts. Durkheim’s study suicide rates provides a background of Merton’s theory of middle range. In this sense, Durkheim hypothesized that anomie would lead to higher suicide rates. Merton, therefore, found that the Durkheim and concept ‘anomie’ would be very fruitful in developing his own theory of deviance. In short, Merton concludes middle range theory with a summary and retrospect as follows:
- Middle-range theories consists of limited sets of assumption from which specific hypotheses are logically derived and confirmed by empirical investigation.
- These theories do not remain separate but are consolidated into wider networks of theory, as illustrated by theories of level of aspiration, reference-group, and opportunity-structure.
- These theories are sufficiently abstract to deal with differing spheres of social behaviour and social structure, so that they transcend sheer description or empirical generalisation the theory of social conflict, for example has been applied to ethnic and racial conflict, class conflict, and international conflict. 4. This type of theory cuts across the distinction between micro-sociological problems, as evidenced in small group research, and macro-sociological problems, as evidenced in comparative studies of social mobility and formal organisation, and the interdependence of social institutions.
5…., many theories of the middle range are consonant with a variety of systems of sociological thought.
- Theories of the middle range are typically in direct time of continuity with the work of classical theoretical formulations.