Social mobility is defined as the displacement of individuals and groups between social classes or different occupation status. In this study, the impact of cultural factors, especially the work ethic and cultural capital on social mobility within a generation and between generations was investigated. Our finding indicates that 32.7 % of men of 35 to 64 years old in Tehran, have experienced upward mobility, 60 % have stayed the same and 5.8% of respondents have experienced downward mobility.
In addition, 49.83% of respondents had Inter-generation upward mobility. Downward Inter-generation mobility includes 22.1%, of respondents and 28% of them did not mention any mobility between two generations. Adjusted R Square in inter-generational mobility Regression is more than 69% and in Intra-generation model is over 15% and both of them are statistically significant. Among the variables of the research conceptual model: 1 - family economic capital ,2- family cultural capital ,3- Respondent's cultural capital and 4 - work ethics, first work ethics and then cultural capital had more direct effect in path analysis of social mobility.
کاظمی‌پور، شهلا. 1374. مهاجرت و تحرک اجتماعی. رساله دکتری. دانشکده علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه تهران.
کاظمی‌پور، شهلا. 1378. الگویی در تعیین پایگاه اجتماعی اقتصادی افراد و سنجش تحرک اجتماعی با تکیه بر مطالعه موردی در شهر تهران. نامه علوم اجتماعی 14: 172 – 139.
کلانتری، صمد و محمد سلمان قایمیزاده. ۱۳۸۱. تحرک اجتماعی و ساخت طبقاتی در همدان. مجله جامعه‌شناسی ایران 16 : 76-100.
معیدفر، سعید. 1378. بررسی میزان اخلاق کار و عوامل فردی و اجتماعی مؤثر بر آن در واحدهای تولیدی صنعتی استان تهران. تهران: مؤسسه کار و تأمین اجتماعی.
معیدفر، سعید. 1385. اخلاق کار و عوامل مؤثر بر آن در کارکنان ادارات دولتی. رفاه اجتماعی ۲۳: ۳۲۱ – 341.
مقدس، علی‌اصغر. ۱۳۷۴. بررسی تحرک طبقاتی و منزلت شغلی در شهر شیراز و بوشهر. رساله دکتری. دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
نایبی، هوشنگ و حمید عبداللهیان. 1381. تبیین قشربندی اجتماعی. نامه علوم اجتماعی ۲۰: 205-236
هاشمی، سید ضیاء. 1383. خانواده مهم‌ترین گروه مرجع جوانان در تهران. فصلنامه فرهنگ عمومی 38.
هاشمی، سید ضیاء. 1383. خانواده مهم‌ترین گروه مرجع جوانان در تهران. فصلنامهفرهنگعمومی38: 43-53.
· Blau, Peter M. and Duncan, Otis Dudley. 1967. The American Occupational Structure. New York: Wiley.
· Boudon, R. 1974b. Educational growth and economic inequality. Quality and Quantity 8: 1–10.
· Boudon, R. 1974a. Education, Opportunity, and Social Inequality: Changing Prospects in Western Society. New York: Wiley.
· Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press.
· Bourdieu, Pierre. 1980. The Production of belief, Contribution to an Economy of Symbolic Goods. Media, Culture and Society 2: 261 – 293.
· Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction, a Social Critique of the judgment of taste (Translated by Richard Nice) Routledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Massachusetts.
· Breen, R. and J. H. Goldthorpe. 2001. Class, mobility and merit: the experience of two British birth cohorts. European Sociological Review 17: 81–101.
· Breen, Richard. 2004. Social Mobility In Europe. Oxford University Press.
· DiPrete, T. A. and D. B. Grusky. 1990. Structure and trend in the process of stratification for American men and women. American Journal of Sociology 96: 107–43.
· Erikson, R. and J. O. Jonsson. 1998. Social origin as an interest-bearing asset: Family background and labour market rewards among employeesin Sweden. Acta Sociologica 41: 19–36.
· Erikson, Robert. and John H. Goldthorpe. 1992. The Constant Flux – a Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
· Featherman, D. L. and R. M. Hauser. 1978. Opportunity and Change. New York: Academic Press.
· Ganzeboom, H. B. G. 1984. Path models for the transmission of social inequality in the Netherlands in 1958 and 1977. In Social stratification and mobility in the Netherlands. 109 –22. Amsterdam: SISWO.
· Goldthorpe, Johan H. 2000. On Sociology: Nu mbers, Narratives and the Integration of Research and Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
· Goldthorpe, Johan. H., Clive. Payne, and Catriona. Llewellyn. 1980. Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain. Oxford: Clarendon Prees.
· Goldthorpe, John. H. and Hope. Keith. 1974. The Social Grading of Occupations: a New Approach and Scale. Oxford: Clarendon Prees.
· Hauser, R. M. and Huang. M. H. 1997. Verbal ability and socioeconomic success: A trend analysis. Social Science Research 26: 331–76.
· Hout, M. 1988. More universalism, less structural mobility: the American
· Hout, M. 1988. “More Universalism, less Structural Mobility: the American Occupational Structure in the 1980s”. American Journal of SociologyVol. 93, No. 6 : 1358-1400.
· Jonsson, J. O. and C. Mills. 1993. Social mobility in the 1970s and 1980s—a study of men and women in England and Sweden. European Sociological Review 9: 229–48.
· LIPSET, S. M. and Bendix. Reinhard. (eds) 1954. Class, Status and Power. London: Rutledge.
· Luijkx, R. and H. B. G. Ganzeboom. 1989. Intergenerational class mobility between 1970 and 1986. in Similar or Different? 5 –30. Amsterdam: SISWO.
· Marshall, G. and S. Roberts. 1997. Against the Odds? Social Class and Social Justice in Industrial Societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
· Sorokin, Pitirim. A. 1957. Social and Cultural Mobility.
· Sorokin, Pitirim. A. 1957. Social and Cultural Mobility. New York, Free Press.
· Werfhorst, Herman. G. van de. 2002. A Detailed Examination of the Role of Education in Intergenerational Social-class Mobility. Social Science Information: 41; 407.
· OECD, 2009. SOCIETY AT A GLANCE: OECD SOCIAL INDICATORS – ISBN 978-92-64-04938-3 – OECD 2009. http://lysander.sourceoecd.org.
)