Readings ST3 Week 2
Merton, R. (1957). Manifest and latent functions.
The distinction between manifest and latent functions was devised to preclude the inadvertent
confusion, often found in the sociological literature, between conscious motivations for social
behavior and its objective consequences.
- Manifest functions those objective consequences for a specified unit (person, subgroup,
social or cultural system) which contribute to its adjustment or adaption and were so
intended
- Latent functions unintended and unrecognized consequences of the same order
Heuristic purposes of the distinction
1. Clarifies the analysis of seemingly irrational social patterns
In the first place, the distinction aids the sociological interpretation of many social practices which
persist even though their manifest purpose is clearly not achieved. Given the concept of latent
function behavior may perform a function for the group, although this function may be quite remote
from the avowed purpose of the behavior.
E.g. A rain ceremony doesn’t actually produce rain, but it’s about the ritual and togetherness of
people. Ceremonials fulfill the latent function of reinforcing the group identity by engaging in a
common activity.
2. Directs attention to theoretically fruitful fields of inquiry
The distinction between manifest and latent functions serves further to direct the attention of the
sociologist to precisely those realms of behavior, attitude and belief where he can most fruitfully
apply his special skills. It is suggested that the distinctive intellectual contributions of the sociologist
are found primarily in the study of unintended consequences (among which are latent functions) of
as well as in the study of anticipated consequences (among which are manifest functions).
3. The discovery of latent functions represents significant increments in sociological knowledge
Findings concerning latent functions represent a greater increment in knowledge than findings
concerning manifest functions. They also represent greater departures from common-sense
knowledge about social life. Moral evaluations, generally based on the manifest consequences, tend
to be polarized in terms of black or white. But the perception of further (latent) consequences often
complicates the picture.
4. Prevents naïve moral judgments as sociological analysis
We should ordinarily expect persistent social patterns and social structures to perform positive
functions which are at the time not adequately fulfilled by other existing patterns and structures.
Proceeding from the functional view, the thought occurs that perhaps this publicly maligned
organization is, under present conditions, satisfying basic latent functions.
Rigney, D. (2010). The Matthew effect
The Matthew effect = the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.
It is not universally true that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Initial advantage does not
always lead to further advantage, and initial disadvantage does not always lead to further
disadvantage. Matthew effects sometimes may produce socially beneficial results, but surely they
may also produce manifest injustices, breeding resentment and even reactive violence among those
Merton, R. (1957). Manifest and latent functions.
The distinction between manifest and latent functions was devised to preclude the inadvertent
confusion, often found in the sociological literature, between conscious motivations for social
behavior and its objective consequences.
- Manifest functions those objective consequences for a specified unit (person, subgroup,
social or cultural system) which contribute to its adjustment or adaption and were so
intended
- Latent functions unintended and unrecognized consequences of the same order
Heuristic purposes of the distinction
1. Clarifies the analysis of seemingly irrational social patterns
In the first place, the distinction aids the sociological interpretation of many social practices which
persist even though their manifest purpose is clearly not achieved. Given the concept of latent
function behavior may perform a function for the group, although this function may be quite remote
from the avowed purpose of the behavior.
E.g. A rain ceremony doesn’t actually produce rain, but it’s about the ritual and togetherness of
people. Ceremonials fulfill the latent function of reinforcing the group identity by engaging in a
common activity.
2. Directs attention to theoretically fruitful fields of inquiry
The distinction between manifest and latent functions serves further to direct the attention of the
sociologist to precisely those realms of behavior, attitude and belief where he can most fruitfully
apply his special skills. It is suggested that the distinctive intellectual contributions of the sociologist
are found primarily in the study of unintended consequences (among which are latent functions) of
as well as in the study of anticipated consequences (among which are manifest functions).
3. The discovery of latent functions represents significant increments in sociological knowledge
Findings concerning latent functions represent a greater increment in knowledge than findings
concerning manifest functions. They also represent greater departures from common-sense
knowledge about social life. Moral evaluations, generally based on the manifest consequences, tend
to be polarized in terms of black or white. But the perception of further (latent) consequences often
complicates the picture.
4. Prevents naïve moral judgments as sociological analysis
We should ordinarily expect persistent social patterns and social structures to perform positive
functions which are at the time not adequately fulfilled by other existing patterns and structures.
Proceeding from the functional view, the thought occurs that perhaps this publicly maligned
organization is, under present conditions, satisfying basic latent functions.
Rigney, D. (2010). The Matthew effect
The Matthew effect = the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.
It is not universally true that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Initial advantage does not
always lead to further advantage, and initial disadvantage does not always lead to further
disadvantage. Matthew effects sometimes may produce socially beneficial results, but surely they
may also produce manifest injustices, breeding resentment and even reactive violence among those
