In ā€œEconomic Sociology,ā€ Charles A. Dana Professor of Sociology Francesco Duina presents students with a social and philosophical question. 

ā€œI ask, ā€˜How many of you like a lot of inequality?ā€™ Usually none of them raises their hands. But then I say, ā€˜How many of you would want perfect equality?ā€™ā€ He shakes his head. ā€œNobody raises their hand. Theyā€™ve never thought of that.ā€ 

Duina brings questions like these to his classes, never revealing much about his beliefs because his focus is on helping students examine their own tendencies. 

ā€œSo, where are you and why? Why do you accept some degree of inequality?ā€ he asks.

Students are thus encouraged to understand or at least see their own ways of justifying the world around them, including inequalities. His most recent book has a similar aim. 

The Social Acceptance of Inequality: On the Logics of a More Unequal World (Oxford 2025), a collection that Duina co-edited with Luca Storti, an associate professor of economic sociology at the University of Turin, Italy, dives in deep on why people across the world accept economic inequalities (understood to be those related to income and wealth). The question is all the more salient because over the past several decades economic inequalities have in most cases grown a great deal. In other words, the real issue is actually not why small inequalities are accepted, but why massive amounts of inequalities are in fact accepted, and even approved of, by significant amounts of people. 

Using four logics of acceptance as a framework for the vastly different contexts across the globe from which their 19 contributors write, the book makes visible to readers the assumptions, biases, and worldviews that people bring to their thinking about inequality. 

This interview with Duina has been lightly edited for clarity and space. 

Meredith McCarroll: You write, in the introduction, that while there is a range of feelings about increased economic inequalities, the aim of the book is to focus on ā€œthe logics by which these inequalities are accepted.ā€ How did you and your co-editor come to determine the need for this volume? 

Francesco Duina: Inequalities have gone up in most cases, and so we chose this because there’s so much written about how bad these things are and why they’re bad and what we can do about it. And there isn’t a whole lot written about why people accept them when they do. We were very eager to understand that acceptance ā€” it is, after all, a major factor that sustains those inequalities and something that we may want to grasp if we in fact want to do something about those inequalities.  

MM: So why an edited collection? 

FD: Because matters are so complicated. If you’re really interested in the question of why economic inequalities are accepted across the world by a wide variety of people, you need extensive knowledge and expertise. No single person can have that. Who am I to write about Southeast Asia and Latin America and Scandinavia and the United States and China? We figured that if we collect various perspectives and voices, and we get a much bigger umbrella and better coverage, then we can really figure things out a little bit.

Of course, we recognize that there are works in different disciplines, such as economics or psychology, that point to single logics of acceptance. Our goal was to identify and contrast and compare all the major logics, and to see what we can conclude by doing so.  

MM: You outline in the introduction four logics of acceptance: market/economic, moral, group, and cultural. Can you briefly describe those four logics? 

FD: Sure. In a shorter piece that we are publishing about the book, by the way, we are actually calling them ā€œjustificationsā€ for the inequalities. The term might be a little easier to grasp than ā€˜ā€œlogicsā€ of acceptance. 

So, when it comes to market/economic logics, people accept inequalities because they believe that they are byproducts of a well-functioning economic system. Trying to eliminate inequalities would mean that wealth production overall would be reduced, investments would go to the wrong places, innovation would be discouraged, and philanthropy would suffer. Importantly, these sorts of logics do not see inequalities as desirable but as inevitable outcomes to be tolerated given what else is being promoted.

Next, we have moral logics, which are based on notions of fairness and justice. In this case, inequalities are seen as actually something that is desirable. There is something good in them. For instance, if you worked hard you deserve to have more. And of course they take different articulations, including inheritance, where one might say, ā€œWell, it’s my grandfatherā€™s.ā€ If asked, what does it have to do with you, we hear, ā€œWell, in the end, it is fair that it comes to me rather than to somebody else because I am of that lineage.ā€ 

Group logics offer a third ground for acceptance. These are the hardest to see in practice ā€¦ at least in their purest form. They are predicated on the idea that a group is, by virtue of who they are and not necessarily what they have done, entitled to more. The clearest example I can think of is the caste system in India. Itā€™s preordained religiously. So the upper caste should have more ā€” it doesn’t matter if they sit around and just do nothing ā€” by virtue of who they are. You see articulations of this in Scandinavia. The Danes believe they are more entitled to the welfare system than immigrants. For instance, they resist giving those immigrants many years of unemployment benefits. Why? Well, some would say that itā€™s ā€œbecause we’re Danes. They’re not.ā€ Of course here many would quickly add that they have worked hard to contribute to that system ā€” and in this regard their logic is also moral. 

Racial distinctions are also at work in group logics. Gender distinctions, age distinctions, and even class distinctions fit into this mindset. 

The fourth set of logics is cultural. In the case of the United States, for instance, the American Dream is a pervasive set of ideas that most people know about. Most of us grew up with it, and assume it is a fair description of what life in this society is like. You’re going to go from poor to rich if you do the right things. It is easy to see how someone who is born and raised in this cultural milieu might be quite likely to tolerate inequalities. Inequalities ā€œmake senseā€™ā€ given what Americans know about their society and world. 

MM: What is new about your volume? What contributions do you see it making to the field or beyond?

FD: Multiple perspectives and an appreciation for the fact that income and wealth inequalities manifest themselves in different settings. And that the same inequality means different things in different places, comes from different places, is or is not problematic in different ways, and is sustained in similar or different ways. Sometimes we find the same logics at work across the world. Others can be more very peculiar to a place. The collection offers an ability to see how the logics themselves compare to, and differ from, each other.

MM: What role do you hope the book might play in terms of solutions to this problem of growing inequality? 

FD: There is already so much written on solutions. We knew that if we wanted to stay consistent with the message of the book, we needed to focus on the logics. We are therefore asking whether there are things in the logics themselves that someone interested in reducing inequalities could tackle. Are there unfounded biases in the logics? Are there faulty assumptions? If the logics themselves inherently have contradictions and or faulty elements, highlighting those things could dissuade some people at least from embracing them  

MM: Are there ways that this approach shows up in your teaching? Is part of your work making the invisible visible? Just allowing students to see that this is part of what’s shaping their core understanding of inequality or fairness? 

FD: Yes. I think my role is to shed light on things. Then students can draw their own conclusions, but the light helps to dissipate the cloudiness and the fog. That’s my goal.

Two years ago, as part of a sociology class on power and inequality, Abby Westberry ā€™19 helped map the locations of shelters and other services for people experiencing homelessness in the Lewiston-Auburn area. In so doing, Westberry learned of a group not often included in discussions about homelessness: those who live for months or even years in motels.

The motels tend to be two or three miles away from the Twin Citiesā€™ downtowns ā€” outside the range of public transportation, and a long walk for someone wanting to get to a housing office or jobs center.

Westberry learned that ā€œindividuals in motels struggled to access these services based on their physical isolation,ā€ she says.

She has just completed her senior honors thesis, ā€œā€˜Before its Smell Became Meā€™: Motel Residency and the Politics of Belonging,ā€ on the topic of motel residency and its connection to housing insecurity.

Sociology major Abby Westberry ’19 of Readfield, Maine, poses on the outskirts of Lewiston. (Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

Sheā€™s one of the very first academic researchers to tackle the subject.

ā€œSheā€™s onto something thatā€™s received very little attention in the academic literature,ā€ says Professor of Sociology Emily Kane, who taught the original class on power and inequality and who was Westberry’s thesis adviser.

American motels emerged in the mid-20th century as inexpensive and convenient accommodations for motorists. With no background checks or upfront costs (like a security deposit) for customers, they often become the last resort for people who canā€™t afford to rent an apartment, or whose eviction histories or criminal records make them ineligible for other housing.

News outlets like the and have documented the lives of motel residents. The Florida Project, a feature film about a child living in a rundown motel near the opulence of Disney World, won a variety of accolades.

But when Westberry looked for scholarly research on long-term motel residency, she found relatively little ā€” just one study on how motel residents access food, and a nonfiction book, Exiled in America, on the lives of a single motelā€™s occupants. (Westberry will defend her thesis in front of a panel that includes that bookā€™s author, Kent State sociology professor Christopher Dum.)

Undeterred, this year Westberry interviewed more than a dozen residents of several motels in Lewiston-Auburn, as well as people who work at service providers like shelters, legal firms, and prisoner reentry groups. She used a method called community-based research, in which community partners, such as service providers, guide the framing of the research project.

Westberry has had plenty of opportunities for community-engaged learning and research. After volunteering in local schools through the Harward Center for Community Partnerships, she took several community-engaged courses. This summer, she received a Ruggles Fellowship to support her research on motels.

ā€œResearch doesnā€™t matter if itā€™s not put to good use,ā€ she says. ā€œYou should make it meaningful to peopleā€™s lives. When you actually go and ask people what they need, not only do you find a lot of subjects that need to be researched, that require academic attention, but you also get knowledge that meaningfully helps those communities ā€” not necessarily coming from me, but coming from community partners.ā€

Professor of Sociology Emily Kane, Westberry’s thesis adviser. (Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

After interviewing the motel residents, Westberry took care to maintain confidentiality by using pseudonyms, omitting mention of illegal activity involving the interviewees, and combining the actual motels into one fictional establishment, Valleyview.

By talking to the residents of Valleyview about how they came to live in the motel, their positive and negative experiences, and their own recommendations for policy changes, Westberry concluded that motel residency reinforces housing instability, though the residents support each other and form strong communities.

Motel life is inherently isolating, Westberry found. Valleyview is miles away from town, along roads without sidewalks. If a resident doesnā€™t have a car, holding down a job, attending a community event, or visiting a social service provider means walking for hours.

A motel room generally canā€™t be a mailing address, which means residents have to take extra steps to do things like receive mail, sign up for services, or vote. The rooms themselves might have a microwave but no other cooking facilities, so residentsā€™ only option is processed foods. Often several people share a small space, fraying tempers.

Paradoxically, even though paying for a motel room from month to month would cost less over the course of a year, some residents can only afford to pay a week at a time. ā€œThey canā€™t build up their money, so they end up paying more overall just because they donā€™t have the saved capital,ā€ Westberry says.

Gaps in social services can make it difficult to move out of a motel. Motel residency doesnā€™t fall under the definition of homelessness that many funding agencies use, meaning residents canā€™t access the services that receive state and federal funding ā€” or they technically make too much money to qualify for income-based programs.

Of course, motel residents themselves already know this, as do some of the social service providers who work with them. Janice Lara-Hewey, a social worker at Catholic Charities Maine, used to run a homeless outreach program that, at times, included motel residents.

Lara-Hewey has seen the same realities that Westberry outlined in her thesis ā€” indeed, she told Westberry about some of them: The nearest grocery store might also be the most expensive, you might have to lug a load of laundry to the laundromat without a car, or you might miss an appointment with a social service agency because of another emergency.

But Lara-Hewey points out that those challenges are not unique to motel residents, and the same systems that lead to motel residency ā€” things like skyrocketing housing costs, inadequate funding for public housing and social services, lack of access to good food ā€” also lead to people living in shelters and cars, or veterans facing homelessness, or college students not being able to find adequate food.

ā€œItā€™s not just about people who are in motels,ā€ she says. ā€œItā€™s about people in general, and people who are struggling, and the importance of all of us being kind and compassionate, and understanding that, for most of us, weā€™re one emergency away from being in the same boat.ā€

Some residents had felony records or sex offender status that made them ineligible for public housing.

Despite the difficulties, Westberry found that people in motels form strong friendships and networks of support, ranging from giving each other rides into town to lending a microwave or money in a pinch.

ā€œYou saw that particularly among members of the community who were recently incarcerated, where they formed a lot of support networks amongst each other to work through all of the vast changes they were experiencing,ā€ she said.

Westberry hopes to show the thesis to the community partners she interviewed and worked with, in order to influence future policies. She asked residents what local services could do to help them specifically, to ā€œmake sure recommendations and solutions weā€™re proposing toward community issues derive from the needs of individuals affected,ā€ she said.

Solutions that help long-term motel residents could include investing in more public housing, expanding public transportation to reach motels, broadening definitions of homelessness so that motel residents are eligible for more programs, and modifying tenancy rules so motel residents have greater protections against removal.

ā€œI wanted something that wouldnā€™t just sit on the shelf at the end of the day and molder away,ā€ Westberry said. ā€œI want something thatā€™s derived from a community-based need and seeking to address community issues. I do think that thatā€™s a really valuable way to conduct research.ā€

The response to mass public shootings such as those in Parkland, Pittsburgh, and Las Vegas has become depressingly predictable.

ā€œEvery time there’s a mass shooting, we say the same things, and people argue past each other, and then we do nothing,ā€ says Michael Rocque, a criminologist and an assistant professor of sociology at ĄÖ²„“«Ć½. ā€œAnd then the next one comes along.ā€

Part of the problem with the public conversation around such shootings, says Rocque, is that itā€™s fueled by politics and perceptions, both poorly supported by data.

ā€œI see all kinds of research that uses slightly [divergent] terms, or you’re not really sure where the data come from,ā€ he says. ā€œThere is no systematic, comprehensive data set that we can all draw on.ā€

But that will change during the next three years, and Rocque is one of three researchers who are making it happen, thanks to a nearly $499,000 grant from the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Assistant Professor of Sociology Michael Rocque, shown here at a December 2016 planning meeting for the college’s Martin Luther King Jr. Day observance, is one of three researchers who will use a federal grant to study mass shootings in the U.S. (Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

Titled ā€œThe Nature, Trends, Correlates, and Prevention of Mass Public Shootings in America, 1976-2018,ā€ the teamā€™s NIJ-funded project comprises six ambitious research goals ā€” including a forecast of the severity of mass public shootings in years to come.

ā€œEvery time there’s a mass shooting, we say the same things, and people argue past each other, and then we do nothing.”

Principal investigator for the project is Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox, a prominent authority on violent crime. Working with Fox as co-principal investigators are Rocque and Grant Duwe, director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections.

ā€œThe most important object of this grant,ā€ says Rocque, is to illuminate mass public shootings with data that is publicly accessible and broadly accepted, and whose provenance is clear. (There is no standard definition of a mass public shooting at the moment. The definition used by Rocque and his colleagues is representative: an incident in which four or more victims are fatally shot in a public location within a 24-hour period, and not in the context of other criminal activity.)

ā€œIf we’re having a conversation about data rather than anecdotes, then I think we’ll be in a better place,ā€ he says. ā€œWe can actually build some strong empirical evidence, a foundation to actually start talking about these things. And maybe we can move forward in a way that actually helps make society safer.ā€

In addition to the shooting-severity outlook, here are the proposed research outcomes for the project:

• detailed descriptions, comprising dozens of variables, of more than 140 mass public shootings since 1976;
• an evaluation of the impact of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban on the incidence and severity of mass shootings;
• an evaluation of the effects of state-level gun legislation, such as concealed-carry laws, on the incidence and severity of such shootings;
• an assessment of the extent to which mass public shootings reflect the copycat effect, which is when an individual seeks to emulate a crime, and ā€œcontagion,ā€ when a crime provokes a rash of similar offenses;
• and a comparison between completed mass shootings and thwarted shooting plots.

Rocque, who in addition to his ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ position is a senior research adviser for Maineā€™s Department of Corrections, has studied mass shooting incidents for years, starting with an article on school shootings that he wrote for the campus paper when he was an undergraduate at the University of Maine.

He studied under Fox at Northeastern, where he earned a doctorate in 2013. And, he says, ā€œGrant Duwe and I have worked together on a couple projects related to our work in corrections.ā€

ā€œIf we’re having a conversation about data rather than anecdotes, then I think we’ll be in a better place,ā€ says Michael Rocque, here teaching his course “Thinking Sociologically with Numbers” in 2015. (Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

The NIJ project ā€œjust came together as an interesting way to help advance our knowledge of the phenomenon, but also allow us to work together on a different project,ā€ Rocque says. The trioā€™s proposal was one of four, including two others related to mass shootings, that were approved in a funding round dedicated to firearms violence.

Much of the data for the project already exists but needs to be augmented with additional research or analyzed in a new way. For instance, the set of shooting descriptions will be based on data that Duwe has compiled, with the research team determining what variables should be added.

ā€œWeā€™ll have to do some digging [to create] what will basically be a huge, comprehensive data set on the assailant, the victims, their background, the location, and how and where the shooting was reportedā€ in the media, including social media, Rocque explains.

ā€œIt’s possible for mass public shootings to be both a gun problem and a mental health problem.”

Similarly, predicting the severity of future mass public shootings will be done by applying a statistical technique called power law distribution to existing data about the number of shooting incidents and the number of victims.

Through newspaper op-eds as well as the traditional academic channels, Duwe, Rocque, and Fox have already deployed data to address common (mis)perceptions about mass shootings. Writing in Politico in October 2017, that, despite what feels like a recent onslaught of such shootings, their frequency hasnā€™t changed much since the 1980s and ā€™90s.

What has changed, he wrote, offering cold comfort, is that shootings have instead become more deadly ā€” the numbers of victims and of deaths have increased.

ā€œThe actual number of incidents seems to be relatively stable,ā€ says Rocque. ā€œBut you wouldn’t know that, in part because people use different definitions of mass shootings and in part because the media seemingly have given it more attention of late.ā€

Rocque’s first article on mass shootings appeared in the campus paper when he was an undergraduate at the University of Maine.

Rocque, who is a familiar presence on op-ed pages in Maine and beyond, and Duwe last February challenged the notion that ā€œmass shooters are not disproportionately mentally illā€ (a phrase widely disseminated following the Parkland tragedy).

Writing in the , they cited research showing that, in fact, the opposite is true: More than half of mass shooters either had been diagnosed with or had shown signs of mental illness before the attack. Thatā€™s more than triple the rate of mental illness among American adults.

On Oct. 9, 2017, people pray at a makeshift memorial in Las Vegas, Nev., for victims of the mass shooting in the city eight days earlier. (AP Photo/John Locher)

But Rocque and Duwe also cautioned that most people with mental illness are not violent and that calling mass public shootings ā€œstrictly a mental health problem rather than a gun problemā€ is also wrong. ā€œIt’s possible for mass public shootings to be both a gun problem and a mental health problem,ā€ they wrote.

In the current political climate, it seems all but impossible to agree on ways to curtail mass public shootings. Yet such agreement definitely wonā€™t be possible without a common foundation of data to build upon.

With that foundation, says Rocque, ā€œwe can start to get past, hopefully, some of these conversations that are so political and so personal, and get to a place where we can better understand these events and why they happen.ā€

The bottom line for impoverished Americans is, of course, that they have less money than their fellow citizens.

Which leads to other things they likely have less of: nutritious food, personal safety, health benefits, vacation time, career opportunities, child care, retirement funds, peace of mind. And the list goes on.

Still, thereā€™s one thing the poorest Americans do possess a lot of: patriotism. Itā€™s a fact: By many measures, the Americans who have the least nevertheless love their country the most, despite ample cause for feeling the opposite.

Paradoxical, no? It struck Professor of Sociology Francesco Duina that way, too. But, as he learned in researching his latest book, it isnā€™t really a paradox after all.

From his research, Francesco Duina offers three possible reasons why the poorest Americans love their country the most.

New from Stanford University Press, Broke and Patriotic: Why Poor Americans Love Their Country lets economically disadvantaged people explain their devotion to the United States. Itā€™s a collection of views that may move readers to think again about Americaā€™s poorest citizens ā€” whose patriotism, as Duina suggests, fueled the White House aspirations of both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.

+An excerpt from Broke and Patriotic

Visiting four municipalities in Alabama and Montana, Duina interviewed more than 60 subjects who had poverty in common but were otherwise quite diverse. The book is his third study of American culture, after Winning: Reflections on an American Obsession, from 2011, and 2014ā€™s Life Transitions in America.

Duina notes that while social scientists have studied the patriotism of many groups, this is the first research to look specifically at the patriotism of low-income Americans.

What led you to write Broke and Patriotic?

I could understand why those Americans who were well-off would be patriotic. But I wanted to understand why low-income Americans are so patriotic when there are reasons to think that they would have issues with their country or its underlying social contract, considering their personal circumstances.

As you point out, worse-off folks in places like Sweden and France typically enjoy greater public benefits than Americaā€™s poor. And yet poor Americans are more patriotic than their counterparts in other wealthy countries.

What I thought to be a puzzle is, for them, not a puzzle at all. First, they donā€™t attribute their situation to their country ā€” they donā€™t say, ā€œIā€™m in this situation because of the society I live in.ā€ They take ownership of their life histories. And so why would they be resentful toward their country?

Also ā€” and this is one of the most moving things that I discovered ā€” if anything, the idea of the greatness of America actually gives them something to hang onto, despite everything. ā€œEverything else has gone poorly for me. Donā€™t take my being an American away from me, because itā€™s the one thing that I can still hang onto with pride.ā€

I would push them by saying, ā€œWell, what about rich people? Do you think itā€™s unfair that they have what they have?ā€ Theyā€™d say, ā€œNo, theyā€™ve earned everything theyā€™ve made.ā€

Francesco Duina leads his political sociology class in Hedge Hall in September. (Theophil Syslo/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

You describe three common elements, broadly speaking, within your respondentsā€™ love of country. They feel that America represents an exceptional promise of hope, and also that the U.S. is both wealthy and generous ā€” the land of milk and honey. But what hit home for me was how they explained America’s greatness in terms of American freedoms.

One of the interviewees that really struck me was Marshall, in Montana, who chose to be homeless, in a way. He said, ā€œLook, I am so free. I can be homeless, and they donā€™t force me to go anywhere. I live on the prairie, Iā€™m working on an app right now, and Iā€™m taking a sabbatical from life. What other country would allow me to just do my thing?ā€

That is really a trait of American society in many ways: ā€œWeā€™re all equal and therefore this equality guarantees me some sense of freedom. I may have nothing, but I have that freedom. I can come and go, do whatever I want, and say whatever I want. This country guarantees that.ā€ And the fact that they would recognize and hold onto that was really moving. What I heard satisfied my curiosity.

Culturally, the United States is very free ā€” freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of saying and doing whatever you want to do. And theyā€™re accurately describing that. Thereā€™s certainly more conformity in many countries, a lot more pressure to do things in certain ways.

Many of Duina’s interviewees felt that that social equality helps to guarantee their freedom. (Theophil Syslo/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

A respondent that you call Eddie said the U.S. is ā€œthe last best hope of man on earth.ā€ Thatā€™s quite a sentiment.

Great guy, very talented. Many of the people I spoke with perceive the country to be a special project designed to give deliverance, to free humanity from problems that have plagued people throughout history. The hope that the U.S. represents for humanity is what gives them hope and dignity as well, and what makes them continue, despite the odds.

Many of them were very optimistic as a result. Something I heard a lot was, ā€œTomorrow something is going to change. Iā€™m poised for a change.ā€

And then thereā€™s the American Dream, the U.S. as the land of milk and honey.

Yeah, despite all of the data that suggests that, in fact, thereā€™s less social mobility nowadays in the United States than in many other advanced countries, and your personal financial success is tied to contextual and structural things, not personal qualities ā€” thereā€™s clearly a sense that this is a place of enormous wealth, and that the American Dream is still alive.

I would say, ā€œBut you know, you donā€™t get as much as other people in other countries.ā€ And they would say, ā€œWell, I donā€™t know what other people get, but I get a lot. Iā€™m not going to go hungry tonight. There will be kitchens and shelters that I can go to and churches that will help me. So the wealth will reach me. And if I have a problem, itā€™s my problem, not the systemā€™s problem.ā€

How is this book relevant to our current politics?

Most of the financially disadvantaged people that Francesco Duina interviewed for Broke and Patriotic, he says, “take ownership of their life histories.” They don’t blame the system. (Theophil Syslo/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

I think this discourse of American greatness is something that Trump tapped into very, very much. To the extent that one wonders why ā€œMake America great againā€ resonated so well, you have elements of the answer in this book, whether with low-income people or middle-class people. I would think that Bernie Sanders also tapped into it a bit, but in a very different way.

Who is the book written for?

People who are interested in understanding the United States, how it functions, what keeps it together ā€” what is at the heart of its social contract, its national identity. My respondents have a genuine attachment to the idea of America, and I think thatā€™s because, in the end, what one discovers is that America is for the people and the people own it.

We should all try and understand their patriotism. Much depends on it. They contribute heavily to the military ā€” their investment in the country, in a way, contributes to stability and social peace. As long as they believe in the American Dream and in the United States as a country they are unlikely to demand fundamental changes of society. And so, if we want to understand why the United States is a stable country, we have to understand why people latch on so tightly to it, even though they appear to be suffering and getting a lot less than the poor elsewhere.

Daily Dot reporter Beth Elderkin turns to Assistant Professor of Sociology Michael Rocque for a story headlined

Michael Rocque, assistant professor of sociology. (Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

The story explores the fact that this country’s active-shooter cases “tend not to have that much in common ā€” except one thing,” Elderkin writes. “Almost every shooter has been a man.”

In 2011, Rocque wrote the paper “ published in The Social Science Journal.

In that paper, Rocque concluded that “few sophisticated or comprehensive explanations have been developed thus far to better understand school rampage shootings…. In general, explanations have focused on solitary, disconnected key factors (e.g., mental illness, bullying, violent media), resulting in an incomplete understanding of school rampage shootings.”

In that vein, pursuing the gender angle alone is fraught, says Rocque. For one thing, stakeholders tend to come at the issue with very different ideas about why a man is a man and a women a woman.

As sociologists and other experts know, biology is only one part of the gender definition.

While Rocque does not discount the effects of biology on genderĀ ā€” in fact, he says, biology may help to explain sociological processesĀ ā€” in large part “the differences we see between men and women are a result of culturalization and socialization,” he tells Elderkin. “I think that there is a fundamental misconception that gender and sex are basically the same thing.ā€

And in our society, one result of how we have created ideas about gender has been to deny boys positive ways to express deep emotions.

Rocque says that society is “teaching boys that itā€™s not okay to show their feelings. If a boy is upset or crying, we tend to have a different reaction to that than if a girl is upset or crying. The only emotion thatā€™s socially acceptable for boys to show is anger.ā€

Michael Rocque, assistant professor of sociology. (Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College)

“It’s hard to think of anything more interesting than why people commit crimes,” says Michael Rocque, a criminologist who joined ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ this summer as an assistant professor of sociology.

Rocque brings a distinctive perspective to ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ sociology: He previously served as director of research for the Maine Department of Corrections. An important part of his DOC work was evaluating the department’s tools and programsĀ ā€” for instance, Maine’s new, nationally unique approach to the incarceration of first offenders aged 18 to 25.

The program is designed around the fact that our brains typically aren’t fully mature until our mid-20s, says Rocque, who still serves as an unpaid adviser to the DOC. In the new program, these young offenders are “actually housed in a juvenile facility and given access to a lot of programming not present in the adult system. The program is getting a lot of attention.” ()

Read more profiles of tenure-track faculty new at ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ in 2014:

• Brett Huggett, assistant professor of biology
• Katharine Ott, assistant professor of mathematics
• GeneviĆØve Robert, assistant professor of geology
• Nathan Tefft, assistant professor of economics

Intellectual interest drives Rocque’s criminology career, but so does a sense of mission. “Something that appealed to me about working at ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ was that the department was looking for someone interested in race, crime and justice,” says Rocque.

How those themes intersect is a compelling focus for him, especially the inequalities in law enforcement and the criminal justice system. “I’m driven by a desire to assist in the quest for social justice,” he says. For instance, Rocque is part of a research team that just finished an analysis of racial bias in the application of the death penalty.

“We live in the United StatesĀ ā€” it’s supposed to be a democracy, equal rights for all,” he says. “You hope that it’s not just, ‘Oh, that’s interesting, blacks who kill whites are much more likely to be given the death penalty,’ and the research just gets put away.

“You hope that your research is used to make the world a better place.”

Along those same lines, Rocque wants to help build bridges between scholars and the people on the front lines of the criminal justice system.

Criminologists believe they could make a difference ā€” but, as Rocque says, “not a lot of practitioners have the time to look through the journals, nor are they necessarily well-versed in the language and analyses used.

“There needs to be an intermediary,” and that’s a role he strives to fill. In his time on staff at DOC, for instance, Rocque produced a departmental newsletter that included digests of new research pertinent to the work of the department.

A Maine native, Rocque studied at the University of Maine and the University of Maryland, and earned a doctorate at Northeastern University. In his dissertation, he took several theoretical explanations of “desistance”Ā ā€” the tendency of criminals to commit fewer crimes and eventually stop as they ageĀ ā€” and argued that each, in its own way, represents the process of maturation.

For instance, so-called social-control theorists point to common life transitions as the moderating factor, he explains. “Men will be hell-raisers, and then getting jobs or getting married will turn them around.”

Another theory, which subsequent research showed to be the most compelling, explains desistance as a product of internal factors, rather than external.

“Over time, people start to think of themselves in a different way,” Rocque explains. An offender’s self-image might transition from being a badass “to someone who wants to contribute to society or to a family man. That identity shift changes their behavior.”

Rocque’s own identity as a person dealing with crime from the right side of the law emerged early, in the form of a fascination with the novels starring teen detective “Brains” Benton. Later, he says, “I did look into becoming a detective. But when I was an undergrad, I learned of the criminology concentration in the sociology department.

“And I fell in love with how this type of field works.”

Professor of Sociology Francesco Duina. (Morris Freeman)

Known for a 2010 study of the American focus on winning, ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ sociologist Francesco Duina views the emotional landscape from a different perspective in his new book, Life Transitions in America (Polity Press).

The book is a thorough exploration of how transitions as central to our lives as going to college, marrying and dying are tied together in American culture ā€” and Duina contrasts American perceptions of transition with those of other nations.

Rather than focusing on a single type of transition, such as childbirth or post-military life, the book examines eight: starting college, getting married, the first child, losing a job, surviving a life-threatening disease, divorce, parents’ death and retirement.

While such shifts have been the object of much study, typically they have been examined as individual occurrences, not as interlinked aspects running throughout an entire culture.

“As does any other society, Americans share certain basic interpretations about how to make sense of transitional moments,” Duina said in an interview. “Yet no one that I could find has investigated what those interpretations, those voices, are. I wanted to shed light on them.”

In addition to calling upon traditional scientific studies, Duina makes use of unorthodox methods and sources ā€” for instance, he compares the categorization and amount of self-help and life-guide books stocked by American, British, Italian, French and Spanish booksellers, and the content of Hallmark cards.

Duina also looks at religious texts, politicians, business leaders, athletes, popular media, government law, college statements, hospital policies and advertisements.

He acknowledges that his approach is novel and that it raises as many questions as it answers. He invites readers to question his conclusions and develop their own interpretations of the subject matter. He acknowledges variations in how these transitions are perceived, and that they are not universal but vary by demographic and life circumstances. And he often compares and contrasts the American perspective with those of other countries.

“Americans are unusually preoccupied with and focused on life transitions,” explains Duina, author of Winning: Reflections on an American Obsession (Princeton University Press, 2010).

“They talk about them in often very optimistic, individualistic and perhaps aggressive fashion — even potentially very painful transitions, like losing one’s parents, are cast in that light,” he says.

“We’re told that many transitions present us with wonderful opportunities for new beginnings, for creating something new ā€” but this is not the whole story. There is also a strand that focuses on our connections with others, the cycle of life and inevitability. All this makes for a very intriguing and unique combination of views.”

The inevitability of change is one thing that doesn’t change, and whether one’s interest is piqued by their own cultural observations or their own lives, Life Transitions in America offers an opportunity to understand these passages in more depth.

Duina has authored four other books: In addition to Winning, they are Institutions and the Economy (Polity Press, 2011), an examination of role of institutions in shaping economic behavior; The Social Construction of Free Trade (Princeton University Press, 2006), an analysis of legal and social change across the world; and Harmonizing Europe (SUNY Press, 1999), focused on political exchanges within the European Union.

Learn more at .

Corey Dolgon, sociologist at Stonehill College.

Corey Dolgon, professor of sociology and director of community-based learning at Stonehill College, visits ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ to discuss the challenges of activism in a neo-liberal society at 4:15 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 22, in the Keck Classroom (Room G52), Pettengill Hall, 4 Andrews Road (Alumni Walk).

Dolgon’s talk is titled From Social Movements to Service Learning (and Back Again?): The Activist Challenge for Civic Engagement in the Age of Neo-Liberalism.Ā Admission is open to the public at no cost.

The talk is sponsored by the Department of Sociology, with co-sponsorship by the Harward Center for Community Partnerships, the Department of Music, the Division of the Social Sciences and the Multifaith Chaplaincy.

For more information, call 207-786-8296.

Dolgon is widely expert in sociology and service learning, and is the author or co-author of several books, including the forthcoming Living Sociology: Social Problems, Service Learning, and Civic Engagement.

He is also known for his “singing lectures” that focus on the role of folksongs in labor organizing and other social movements.

Dolgon previously served as professor and chair of Worcester State College’s sociology department as well as director of its Center for Service Learning and Civic Engagement. He holds a bachelor’s degree in English and sociology from Boston University; a master’s in American studies from Baylor University; and a doctorate in American culture from the University of Michigan.

Silvia Dominguez, an interdisciplinary scholar who researches the welfare of women, children and minority populations, offers the talk Getting Ahead: Social Mobility, Public Housing and Immigrant Networks at 4:15 p.m. Thursday, May 9, in Room G52, Pettengill Hall, 4 Andrews Road (Alumni Walk).

The lecture concludes the series City, Neighborhood and Society: Social Science Approaches to Urban Issues. This series has been sponsored by the Department of Sociology with support from the Program in Environmental Studies, the Division of the Social Sciences, the Office of Intercultural Education and the Office of the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Inclusion.

Additional support for specific speakers in the series has been provided by the Harward Center for Community Partnerships, the departments of politics, anthropology and history, the Program in Women and Gender Studies, and OUTFront.

For more information, please call 207-786-8296.

Dominguez is an associate professor in the department of sociology and human services at Northeastern University. She is also a faculty fellow at the Urban Health Research Institute, the Gender and Sexuality Program and the Brudnick Center for the Study of Conflict and Violence at Northeastern.

A forensically trained psychotherapist, Dominguez is affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital’s Division on Global Psychiatry. She helped developed the 2009 National Mental Health Policy for the Republic of Liberia.

A Ford Foundation and Woodrow Wilson fellow, she chairs the Latino Section of the American Sociological Association and has been recognized by the United States Census Bureau as an ethnography expert on low-income populations. She holds degrees in sociology, psychology, forensic social work and social welfare policy.

Professor of Sociology Emily Kane. Photograph by Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College.

Maine Campus Compact will honor two members of the ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College community, a member of the sociology faculty and a senior from Brunswick, for their commitment to public involvement.

A consortium of Maine schools dedicated to advancing the civic mission of higher education, MCC will present the Donald Harward Award for Faculty Service-Learning Excellence to Professor of Sociology Emily Kane of Auburn. Kane, who structures much of her coursework around community-engaged research, is one of three faculty members at Maine schools to receive this year’s award.

Kimberly Sullivan ’13. Photograph by Phyllis Graber Jensen/ĄÖ²„“«Ć½ College.

Kimberly Sullivan, a senior psychology major who co-founded the Tree Street Youth Center, a youth outreach program in Lewiston, is among six students at Maine colleges honored with the Heart and Soul Award, recognizing exemplary civic engagement.

Kane, Sullivan and the other recipients will receive their awards in an April 30 ceremony in the Hall of Flags at the Maine State House, in Augusta.

• Read about Emily Kane’s community-engaged curriculum.
• Read about Kimberly Sullivan and Tree Street Youth Center.