The term habitus(/ˈhæbɪtəs/) refers to ingrained habits, skills, and psychological/behavioral dispositions. It is the way that individuals perceive the social world around them and react to it. These dispositions are usually shared by people with similar backgrounds (such as social class, religion, nationality, ethnicity, education, profession etc.). The habitus is acquired through imitation (mimesis) and is the reality that individuals are socialized, which includes their individual experience and opportunities. Thus, the habitus represents the way group culture and personal history shape the body and the mind, and as a result, shape present social actions of an individual.
Pierre Bourdieu suggested that the habitus consists of both the hexis (the tendency to hold and use one’s body in a certain way, such as posture and accent) and more abstract mental habits, schemes of perception, classification, appreciation, feeling, and action. These schemes are not mere habits: Bourdieu suggested they allow individuals to find new solutions to new situations without calculated deliberation, based on their gut feelings and intuitions, which Bourdieu believed were collective and socially shaped. These attitudes, mannerisms, tastes, moral intuitions and habits have influence on the individual’s life chances, so the habitus not only is structured by an individual’s objective past position in the social structure but also structures the individual’s future life path. Pierre Bourdieu argued that the reproduction of the social structure results from the habitus of individuals (Bourdieu, 1987).
References
Reay, D.. (2004). “It’s all becoming a habitus”: Beyond the habitual use of habitus in educational research. British Journal of Sociology of Education
“The concept of habitus lies at the heart of bourdieu’s theoretical framework. it is a complex concept that takes many shapes and forms in bourdieu’s own writing, even more so in the wider sociological work of other academics. in the ®rst part of this paper i develop an understanding of habitus, based on bourdieu’s many writings on the concept, that recognizes both its permeability and its ability to capture continuity and change. i also map its relationship to bourdieu’s other concepts, in particular ®eld and cultural capital. in the second part of the paper i examine attempts to operationalize habitus in empirical research in education. i critique the contemporary fashion of overlaying research analyses with bourdieu’s concepts, including habitus, rather than making the concepts work in the context of the data and the research settings. in the ®nal part of the paper i draw on a range of research examples that utilize habitus as a research tool to illustrate how habitus can be made to work in educational research.”
Lyons, A. P., Bourdieu, P., & Nice, R.. (1980). Outline of a Theory of Practice. ASA Review of Books
“Outline of a theory of practice is recognized as a major theoretical text on the foundations of anthropology and sociology. pierre bourdieu, a distinguished french anthropologist, develops a theory of practice which is simultaneously a critique of the methods and postures of social science and a general account of how human action should be understood. with his central concept of the habitus, the principle which negotiates between objective structures and practices, bourdieu is able to transcend the dichotomies which have shaped theoretical thinking about the social world. the author draws on his fieldwork in kabylia (algeria) to illustrate his theoretical propositions. with detailed study of matrimonial strategies and the role of rite and myth, he analyses the dialectical process of the ‘incorporation of structures’ and the objectification of habitus, whereby social formations tend to reproduce themselves. a rigorous consistent materialist approach lays the foundations for a theory of symbolic capital and, through analysis of the different modes of domination, a theory of symbolic power.”
Bourdieu, P.. (1969). Structures, Habitus, Practices. In The Logic of Practice
“This paper aims to balance the conceptual reception of bourdieu’s sociology in the united states through a conceptual re-examination of the concept of habitus. i retrace the intellectual lineage of the habitus idea, showing it to have roots in claude levi-strauss structural anthropology and in the developmental psychology of jean piaget, especially the latter’s generalization of the idea of operations from mathematics to the study of practical, bodily-mediated cognition. one important payoff of this exercise is that the common misinterpretation of the habitus as an objectivist and reductionist element in bourdieu’s thought is dispelled. the habitus is shown to be instead a useful and flexible way to conceptualize agency and the ability to transform social structure. thus ultimately one of bourdieu’s major contributions to social theory consists of his development of a new radical form of cognitive sociology, along with an innovative variety of multilevel sociological explanation in which the interplay of different structural orders is highlighted.”
Jason D. Edgerton, & Roberts, L. W.. (2014). Habitus. In Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research
“Definition the relationship (correlation) between separate scales or subscales. description the value between +1 and −1 that represents the correlation between two scales is the interscale correlation. in quality of life literature, interscale correlations are used frequently (aaronson et al., 1993; borghede & sullivan, 1996; fekkes et al., 2000; hearn & higginson, 1997). a researcher may choose to determine the interscale correlation in situations in which she/he has multiple scales and wants to investigate the relationship between the variables that those scales are measuring. depending on the nature of the research, a high or low interscale correlation could be sought after. in the case of a validity study, a researcher may want to examine how similar a newly created scale is to another scale that is deemed to be a ‘gold standard.’ finding that the researcher’s scale has a high correlation with the other scale would lend itself to evidence of”
Wacquant, L.. (2007). Esclarecer o Habitus. Educação & Linguagem
“Tomando como referência a obra do sociólogo pierre bourdieu, o presente artigo traz uma reconstituição da gênese da noção de habitus presente nos trabalhos do autor e, em uma perspectiva de síntese, procura documentar algumas de suas principais propriedades teóricas. traça, igualmente, um pequeno retrato dos principais horizontes de mobilização sociológica de que a noção tem sido alvo, destacando que a noção de habitus, para bourdieu, é um modo estenográfico de designar uma postura de investigação adequada à observação metódica da constituição social de agentes em quadros institucionais diversos.”
Crossley, N.. (2013). Habit and Habitus. Body and Society
“This article compares the concept of habitus, as formulated in the work of mauss and bourdieu, with the concept of habit, as formulated in the work of merleau-ponty and dewey. the rationale for this, on one level, is to seek to clarify these concepts and any distinction that there may be between them – though the article notes the wide variety of uses of both concepts and suggests that these negate the possibility of any definitive definitions or contrasts. more centrally, however, the purpose of the comparison is to draw out a number of important issues and debates which, it is argued, further work must address if the concepts of habit and habitus are to continue to prove useful and illuminating in social science.”
Silva, E. B.. (2016). Habitus: Beyond sociology. Sociological Review
“This paper presents a contribution of a set of interrelated innovative thinking to revitalize the sociological understanding of the notion of the habitus. it discusses contributions by sociologists exploring the sources of bourdieu’s inspiration from psychology and psychoanalysis to the development of the concept, and brings in new thinking inspired by authors and frameworks that branch out of sociology to bring into sociology fresher thinking. three areas of concern about habitus are focused on: firstly, the objectivism and subjectivism dichotomy; secondly, the plasticity or rigidity of the concept; and thirdly, the implications of intangibles attached to the notion. the paper introduces a special section including five articles on theoretical and empirical explorations bringing exciting perspectives to creative and critical sociology.”
Gaddis, S. M.. (2013). The influence of habitus in the relationship between cultural capital and academic achievement. Social Science Research
“This paper examines some of the issues surrounding student retention in higher education. it is based on the case study of a modern university in england that has good performance indicators of both widening participation (i.e. increasing the diversity of the student intake) and student retention. the two-fold nature of this success is significant, as it has been asserted that greater diversity will necessarily lead to an increase in student withdrawal. furthermore, changes to student funding in the uk put greater financial pressures and stress on students, especially those from low-income groups. nevertheless, many students cope with poverty, high levels of debt and significant burdens of paid work to successfully complete their courses of study. drawing on the work of r eay et al. (2001), this paper adopts and explores the terinstitutional habitus’, and attempts to provide a conceptual and empirical understand-ing of the ways in which the values and practices of a higher education institution impact on student retention.”
Mutch, A.. (2003). Communities of practice and habitus: A critique. Organization Studies
“Outline of a theory of practice is recognized as a major theoretical text on the foundations of anthropology and sociology. pierre bourdieu, a distinguished french anthropologist, develops a theory of practice which is simultaneously a critique of the methods and postures of social science and a general account of how human action should be understood. with his central concept of the habitus, the principle which negotiates between objective structures and practices, bourdieu is able to transcend the dichotomies which have shaped theoretical thinking about the social world. the author draws on his fieldwork in kabylia (algeria) to illustrate his theoretical propositions. with detailed study of matrimonial strategies and the role of rite and myth, he analyses the dialectical process of the ‘incorporation of structures’ and the objectification of habitus, whereby social formations tend to reproduce themselves. a rigorous consistent materialist approach lays the foundations for a theory of symbolic capital and, through analysis of the different modes of domination, a theory of symbolic power.”
Bourdieu, P.. (1986). Habitus, code et codification. Actes de La Recherche En Sciences Sociales
“S’il est de la vocation même de la sociologie de rappeler que, selon le mot de montesquieu, on ne transforme pas la société par décret, il reste que la conscience des conditions sociales de l’efficacité des actes juridiques ne doit pas conduire à ignorer ou à nier ce qui fait l’efficacité propre de la règle, du règlement et de la loi. la juste réaction contre le juridisme, qui conduit à restituer leur place, dans l’explication des pratiques, aux dispositions constitutives de l’habitus, n’implique nullement que l’on mette entre parenthèses l’effet propre de la règle explicitement énoncée, surtout lorsque, comme la règle juridique, elle est associée à des sanctions. et inversement, s’il n’est pas douteux que le droit exerce une efficacité spécifique, imputable notamment au travail de codification, de mise en forme et en formule, de neutralisation et de systématisation, que réalisent, selon les lois propres de leur univers, les professionnels du travail symbolique, il reste que cette efficacité, qui se définit par opposition à l’inapplication pure et simple ou à l’application fondée sur la contrainte pure, s’exerce dans la mesure et dans la mesure seulement où le droit est socialement reconnu, et rencontre un accord, même tacite et partiel, parce qu’il répond, au moins en apparence, à des besoins et des intérêts réels.”
Hanks, W. F.. (2005). PIERRE BOURDIEU AND THE PRACTICES OF LANGUAGE. Annual Review of Anthropology
“This paper synthesizes research on linguistic practice and critically examines the legacy of pierre bourdieu from the perspective of linguistic anthropology. bourdieu wrote widely about language and linguistics, but his most far reaching engagement with the topic is in his use of linguistic reasoning to elaborate broader sociological concepts including habitus, field, standardization, legitimacy, censorship, and symbolic power. the paper examines and relates habitus and field in detail, tracing the former to the work of erwin panofsky and the latter to structuralist discourse semantics. the principles of relative autonomy, boundedness, homology, and embedding apply to fields and their linkage to habitus. authority, censorship, and euphemism are traced to the field, and symbolic power is related to misrecognition. and last, this chapter relates recent work in linguistic anthropology to practice and indicates lines for future research.”
Bourdieu, P.. (2000). Making the Economic Habitus: Algerian Workers Revisited. Ethnography
“During the war of national liberation algeria offered a quasi-laboratory situation for analysing the mismatch between the economic dispositions fashioned in a precapitalist economy, embedded in relations of group honour, and the rationalized economic cosmos imposed by colonization. ethnographic observation of this mismatch revealed that, far from being axiomatic, the most elementary economic behaviours (working for a wage, saving, credit, birth control, etc.) have definite economic and social conditions of possibility which both economic theory and the `new economic sociology’ ignore. acquiring the spirit of calculation required by the modern economy entails a veritable conversion via the apostasy of the embodied beliefs that underpin exchange in traditional kabyle society. the `folk economics’ of a cook from algiers allows us to grasp the practical economic sense guiding the emerging algerian working class at the dawn of the country’s independence.”
King, A.. (2000). Thinking with Bourdieu against Bourdieu: A “practical” critique of the habitus. Sociological Theory
“There are two strands in bourdieu’s sociological writings. on the one hand, bourdieu argues for a theoretical position one might term his ‘practical theory’ which emphasizes virtuosic interactions between individuals. on the other hand, and most frequently, bourdieu appeals to the concept of the habitus according to which society consists of objective structures and determined-and isolated-individuals. although bourdieu believes that the habitus is compatible with his practical theory and overcomes the impasse of objectivism and subjectivism in social theory, neither claim is the case; the habitus is incompatible with his practical theory, and it retreats quickly into objectivism. however, bourdieu’s practical theory does offer a way out of the impasse of objectivism and subjectivism by focussing on the intersubjective interactions between individuals.”
Crossley, N.. (2001). The phenomenological habitus and its construction. Theory and Society
“This article focuses on the phenomenological habitus and its construction. the concepts ‘habit’ and ‘habitus,’ having almost disappeared from the sociological lexicon during the earlier part of the post-war period, are currently enjoying renewed interest in the social sciences. this is due, in large part, to the work of the sociologist pierre bourdieu. his work draws out the significance and relevance of the concept of habit for sociological purposes and in doing so makes a very appealing case for a habit or disposition based theory of agency. this is not intended as a phenomenological critique of bourdieu, a call to replace his conception of habit with a phenomenological one nor a call for a full scale ‘marriage’ of phenomenology with bourdieu’s sociology. bourdieu formulates his concept of the habitus in the context of a critical engagement with structuralism and ‘social physics,’ on the one hand, and ‘social phenomenology’ on the other. against social physics and structuralism, he argues for a notion of competent and active agency.”
Sewell, W. H.. (1992). A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation. American Journal of Sociology
“‘Structure’ is one of the most important, elusive, and undertheo- rized concepts in the social sciences. setting out from a critique and reformulation of anthony giddens’s notion of the duality of structure and pierre bourdieu’s notion of habitus, this article at- tempts to develop a theory of structure that restores human agency to social actors, builds the possibility of change into the concept of structure, and overcomes the divide between semiotic and material- ist visions of structure. ‘structure’”
Nash, R.. (1990). Bourdieu on Education and Social and Cultural Reproduction. British Journal of Sociology of Education
“Bourdieu’s work has attracted considerable interest and, not withstanding criticism of his style and obscure theoretical formulations, has introduced some powerful concepts into social theory. this paper examines bourdieu’s contribution to the sociology of education and especially his account of socially differentiated educational attainment. particular attention is given to issues of structure, agency and habitus, the cultural autonomy of the school, arbitrary and necessary school cultures, and the distinction between primary and secondary effects on educational differences. some specific criticisms, for example elster’s charge of a double account of domination, are also addressed. bourdieu’s concentration on habitus as the most significant generator of practice is held to be a theory of socialisation and the paper examines the nature of the explanation of social practice provided by such theories. the argument concludes with a plea for critical tolerance with respect to bourdieu’s work but with a suggestion that his account of socially differentiated educational attainment in terms of habitus is finally inadequate.”
