Skip to main content
Log in

Action and institution, network and function: The cybernetic concept of social structure

  • Articles
  • Published:
Sociological Forum

Abstract

A program of research on the formal representation and analysis of institutional structures is taken a step further by integrating it with recent developments in the formal representation of hierarchical levels of inclusion or part-whole relations. We begin by reviewing a cybernetic conception of action and show how this relates to the construction of production system models of institutional structures. Thereafter, we treat the inclusion hierarchy to show how the production rule constitutes the conceptual unit integrating social knowledge and social action upon which are built two hierarchies, involving institutional entities and social networks, respectively. We indicate some of the detailed forms of control involved in these hierarchies and then show how a form of functional analysis can be undertaken on this basis. Finally, we provide a lengthy discussion of the promise and problems of this mode of structural analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axten, N. andT.J. Fararo 1977 “The information processing representation of institutionalised social action.” In P. Krishnan (ed.), Mathematical Models of Sociology. Sociological Review Monograph 24. Keele, UK: University of Keele.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axten, N. andJ. Skvoretz 1980 “Roles and role-programs.” Quality and Quantity 14:547–583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, F. L. andC. C. Harvey 1975 The Structure of Social Systems. New York: Gardner Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, P. andT. Luckmann 1966 The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudon, R. 1982 The Unintended Consequences of Social Action. New York: St. Martin's Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiger, R. L. 1974 “The duality of persons and groups.” Social Forces 53:181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. andG. A. Miller 1963 “An introduction to the formal analysis of natural languages.” In R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush and E. Galanter (eds.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 2. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelfriet, J. 1974 Simple Program Schemes and Formal Languages. Lectures Notes in Computer Science: 20. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1978 “An introduction to catastrophes.” Behavioral Science 23:291–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1981 “Social activity and social structure: A contribution to the theory of social systems.” Cybernetics and Systems 12:53–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fararo, T. J. andP. Doreian 1984 “Tripartite structural analysis: Generalizing the Breiger-Wilson formalism.” Social Networks 6:141–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fararo, T. J. andJ. Skvoretz 1984 “Institutions as production systems.” The Journal of Mathematical Sociology 10:117–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. 1984 “Turning a profit from mathematics: The case of social networks.” In T. Fararo (ed.), Mathematical Ideas and Sociological Theory, New York: Gordon and Breach.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. 1967 Studies in Ethnomethology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, L. N. andM. H. van Broembson 1974 “On simple stochastic models of diffusion.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 2:121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise, D. R. 1979 Understanding Events: Affect and the Construction of Social Action. ASA Rose Monograph. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1950 The Human Group. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1974 Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, rev. ed. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopcroft, J. andJ. Ullman 1969 Formal Languages and Their Relation to Automata. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labov, W. andD. Fanshel 1977 Therapeutic Discourse. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi-Strauss, C. 1963 Structural Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lidz, C. W. 1984 “Requisites for a model of institutionalized normative structures.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 10(2):191–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1968 Social Theory and Social Structure, enlarged ed.:424–438. New York: The Free Press

    Google Scholar 

  • 1976 Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. 1977 “The effects of education as an institution”. American Journal of Sociology 83(1):55–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. A., E. Galanter andK. H. Pibram 1960 Plans and the Structure of Behavior. New York: Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1951 The Foundations of Social Anthropology. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1957 The Theory of Social Structure. London: Cohen and West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemeth, R. J. andD. A. Smith 1985 “International trade and world-systems structure: A multiple network analysis.” Review 7:517–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A. andH. A. Simon 1972 Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, J. R. 1977 Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Palo Alto, CA: Tioga.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1951 The Social System. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1960 “The pattern variables revisited.” American Sociological Review 25(4):467–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. andN. Smelser 1956 Economy and Society. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powers, W. T. 1973 Behavior: The Control of Perception. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, S. F. 1969 Crisis in a Cloister. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University.

  • Schank, R. C. andP. Abelson 1977 Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1978 “Information diffusion in formally structured populations: An information processing approach.” Journal of Cybernetics (now Cybernetics and Systems) 8:51–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1984 “Languages and grammars of action and interaction: Some further results.” Behavioral Science 29(2):81–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1980 “Languages and grammars of action and interaction: A contribution to the formal theory of action.” Behavioral Science 25:9–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1984 “Issues in institution representation: Reply to the commentaries.” The Journal of Mathematical Sociology 10:211–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skvoretz, J., T. J. Fararo andN. Axten 1980 “Role programme models and the analysis of institutional structure.” Sociology 14:49–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, D. G. 1984 The Growth of Sociological Theories. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winston, P. H. 1977 Artificial Intelligence, 2d ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. P. 1982 “Relational networks: An extension of sociometric concepts.” Social Networks 4:105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelditch, M., Jr. 1984 “Meaning, conformity, and control.” The Journal of Mathematical Sociology 10:183–190.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fararo, T.J., Skvoretz, J. Action and institution, network and function: The cybernetic concept of social structure. Sociol Forum 1, 219–250 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115738

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115738

Keywords

Navigation