Evolution and Nebulousness in Theories

Social scientists have a clear choice in how they may approach theory development. One path leads to nebulous theories that lack any real explanatory power. The other path capitalizes on evolutionary principles of variation and selection, vastly increasing the chances for explanatory success. I illustrate these ideas by reference to artificial life programs, and discuss the implications for theory construction in the social sciences

Theory, Science, and \u27Micro-macro\u27 Bridges in Structural Social Psychology

Social psychology stands to benefit from multilevel theories that link it to both lower and higher levels of analysis. Making the link, however, requires a level of theoretical rigor heretofore relatively uncommon in the social sciences. After refuting several common objections to this brand of theorizing, I offer a rationale and a set of criteria for multilevel theory construction

Graduate Training in Sociological Theory and Theory Construction

Nearly all of sociology\u27s top graduate training programs require their students to complete one or two courses on sociological theory. The instructors for these courses have an extraordinary opportunity to affect the perspectives and practices of future generations of scholars. This study assesses the backgrounds, attitudes, beliefs, and practices of those instructors regarding different approaches to theorizing, with particular attention paid to topics related to science and to theory construction. Sociologists who teach required theory courses in the discipline\u27s top fifty graduate training programs were asked a series of questions pertaining to their own training and to the courses they were teaching: attitudes toward different kinds of theorizing, perceptions of the role that theory plays in sociology and in science, and views on the nature of science. Results indicate a strong consensus on the most important classical theorists (Marx, Weber, and Durkheim). However, attitudes and practices varied widely in regard to other classical theorists, contemporary sociological theory, and the role of scientific standards in the development of sociological knowledge. The author explores some of the implications of these attitudes and practices

Power in Exchange Networks: Critique of a New Theory

Markovsky et al criticize Yamaguchi\u27s (1996) theory of power in social exchange networks, revealing internal theoretical contradictions. Yamaguchi responds to the criticisms

SOCIAL INFLUENCE ON PARANORMAL BELIEFS

In spite of strong public expressions of skepticism from the scientific community, polls show that more than nine out of ten American adults profess belief in paranormal phenomena. Some scientists view this as a social problem, directing much blame (but little research) at a variety of sources including lack of critical thinking skills, fads, need for transcendent experiences, failure of the educational system, and cultural cycles. Social impact theory provides an alternative focus: it views paranormal beliefs as a natural consequence of social influence processes in interpersonal settings. In this study, subjects in a laboratory experiment were informed that some people believe pyramids harness a mysterious form of energy that preserves objects stored within them. They subsequently judged the relative freshness of fruit stored in a box and in a pyramid-shaped container. Although the judged stimuli essentially were identical, we observed that (1) subjects reported more pyramid power effects after hearing the credulous judgments of a confederate posing as a subject; (2) influence was heightened by a high-status confederate; (3) influence scarcely diminished when a prior subject\u27s (i.e., an absent confederate\u27s) judgments were reported to the subject by the experimenter; and (4) removing paranormal implications heightened the confederate\u27s impact. Toour knowledge, this is the first experimental demonstration of the interpersonal transmission of paranormal beliefs and the first time that all three of social impact theory\u27s source factors- strength, immediacy, and number- have been tested in a single controlled experimental setting

Assessing Fundamental Power Differences in Exchange Networks: Iterative GPI

Networks have been discovered for which Network Exchange Theory (NET Markovsky, Willer and Patton 1988; Lovaglia, Skvoretz, Willer and Markovsky 1995) fails to provide tenable predictions. Here we elaborate NET to create a more general method. We show not only when and where exchange networks break into simpler substructures, but propose rules to decisively classify networks and substructures as strong, weak, or equal power. In doing so, we advance general heuristics for power development in exchange networks and demonstrate the promise of an approach using reciprocal comparison of general heuristics, formal theory, and computer simulation