Cultural Capital in a Digitalized World |
|
| Coordinator 1 | Ms Elif Sari (Leibniz Institute for Educational Trajectories (LIfBi)) |
| Coordinator 2 | Dr Christoph Homuth (Leibniz Institute for Educational Trajectories (LIfBi)) |
When Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Passeron popularized the concept of cultural capital in the social sciences almost 50 years ago to explain social reproduction, the world was different. Not only were social structures and the extend of of social inequality different, but there was also no digitalization. For example, knowledge was not as easily accessible as today (Wikipedia vs. printed dictionaries) and cultural events were more exclusive due to improvements in societal wealth.
However, in today’s surveys, we still refer to this concept at its core when we measure cultural capital. But do our “established” survey instruments, such as the number of books in the household, participation in highbrow activities (e.g., opera, ballet, theatre), or home possessions, continue to be applicable measures of relevant cultural capital? Or are new forms of distinction emerging, and do "old" ones become less relevant? Are there any “new” forms of cultural capital in a digital world we should focus on, and how could they be measured? After all, not only are books on the internet, but also cultural events take place in the virtual world.
Additionally, survey methods changed over time and digital forms, especially web-based surveys became the norm which might impact data quality.
We welcome contributions that address these and related issues of measuring cultural capital in today’s world and explore, e.g, established instruments by analyzing age and cohort effects and gauge how large the explanatory contribution of established measurements of cultural capital for societal phenomena still is; or discuss new definitions and operationalizations of cultural capital that lead to innovative ways or new methods and instruments; or explore mode effects of established instruments.