Sociology 600: Graduate Research Methods
Brigham Young University
Fall 2008
Wednesday, 1:30-4:00pm
2002 JFSB
Professor Mikaela Dufur
mikaela_dufur@byu.edu
422-1720
Office Hours: 10:00am-12:00pm W/Th, or by appt. (2037 KFSB)
“‘Method’ has to do, first of all, with how to ask and answer questions with some assurance that the answers are
more or less durable. ‘Theory’ has to do, above all, with paying close attention to the words one is using, especially
their degree of generality and their logical relations. The primary purpose of both is clarity of conception and
economy of procedure, and most importantly just now, the release rather than the restriction of the sociological
imagination.”
— C. Wright Mills, The Sociological Imagination, 1959
Objectives: The goal of this course is to familiarize students with the concepts and tools involved in research
design. This course will not provide detailed training on using specific methods, but rather will focus on overall
design, including the process of selecting from among specific methods. After completing this course, you should be
able to read, identify underlying assumptions about, and critique social research; identify a variety of sociological
research methods and determine which methods might best answer certain research questions; and design and write
research proposals. We will examine typical phases in the development of research inquiries, culminating in
students’ writing their own research proposal (to get the most out of class, I would encourage you to use this project
to develop your thesis prospectus).
Readings:
Rudestam, Kjell Erik, and Rae R. Newton. 2001. Surviving Your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content
and Process (2nd Ed.). Sage Publications, Inc. ISBN# 0-7619-1961-9
Firebaugh, Glenn. 2008. 7 Rules for Social Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton U. Press. ISBN# 978-0691135670
Articles as described below in schedule
Brigham Young University is committed to providing a working and learning atmosphere that reasonably
accommodates qualified persons with disabilities. If you have any disability that may impair your ability to complete
this course successfully, please contact the Services for Students with Disabilities Office (378-2767). Reasonable
academic accommodations are reviewed for all students who have qualified documented disabilities. Services are
coordinated with the student and instructor by the SSD office. If you need assistance or if you feel you have been
unlawfully discriminated against on the basis of disability, you may seek resolution through established grievance
policy and procedures. You should contact the Equal Employment Office at 378-5895, D-282 ASB.
Grading:
Final Exam—15%
Final Research Proposal—15%
Research Proposal Draft #1—10%
Research Proposal Draft #2—10%
Research Proposal Draft #3—15%
Assessment of Classmate’s Paper Drafts—15%
Review of Classmate’s Final Proposal—10%
Diagramming/Critical Analysis Assignment —10%
Attendance and Participation: Reading prior to class and coming prepared to participate in class discussions is
critical to your success in the course. You will need to prepare a typed list of two questions per article/reading
assignment for each class period that you can share with the class inviting discussion. These questions will be turned
in each class period. You will also have two opportunities to bring good examples of sociological research design
and/or writing to class (one when we discuss literature reviews; one when we discuss results). In addition to bringing
a copy of your example to class, you will bring a one-page discussion of why your example is a good one. You will
bring enough copies of this one-page report for all class participants. In preparing these, you might consider things
you thought the researchers did well, things you thought the researchers could have improved, pros and cons
concerning the particular data used, clarity and thoroughness of explanations, how questions from this research can
or should be applied to other research we use in class, and how the article raises additional questions about how
sociologists do research. You should always include a couple of ideas on how the research might be extended.
Diagramming/Critical Analysis Assignment: Good sociological research tends to grow out of a thorough
grounding in previous work. This assignment is designed to help you dissect and understand previous literature. You
will break down an article into its component parts and assess how well the author(s) presented and supported their
arguments. A detailed handout describing how to do the assignment is included at the end of this syllabus. You are
welcome to use an article from class for the diagramming assignment; you may also choose a different article of
substantive interest to you. It will be vastly to your benefit to choose a diagramming article that is an empirical piece
of research (has a hypothesis and uses data of some kind to test that hypothesis). In addition to completing the
diagram, you will write a 2-3-page critique of the article, including both positive and negative aspects of the
research design and possible improvements that could be made to the design in a “perfect world” (see suggestions
above). The diagramming assignment will be due at the beginning of class on Wednesday, September 10. This
assignment is worth 10% of your final grade.
Exams: There will be only one exam: a final exam. The final exam is cumulative. The exam will be made up of
essay questions; these questions will be drawn *BOTH* from readings and from classroom discussion. The final
exam is worth 15% of your final grade. The final exam is in take-home format and will be turned in to my mailbox in
2008 JFSB. The final exam must be turned in to the aforementioned mailbox by 6:00PM on Monday, December
15. You are welcome to turn the final in to the mailbox before that time, but any finals turned in after 6:00PM on
December 15 will not be accepted.
Research Paper: As discussed above, one of the objectives of this class is to help you prepare a research proposal
on a topic of your choice; ideally, this will be your thesis or dissertation prospectus. Each student is expected to
prepare a research proposal for a project of his or her choosing. The proposal will require an introduction, review of
the literature, and data and methods section (description of the method to be used).
Your research proposal will be presented to the class and graded in three phases and a final proposal:
Phase 1 will include an introduction of the research question to be addressed, an initial synthesis of the literature
reviewed, and an initial model of the important variables/concepts to be studied. This phase should be 4 - 5 pages
[10% of grade]. Phase 1 proposals are due in class Wednesday, October 8; Phase 1 presentations will be
Wednesday, October 22.
Phase 2 will include an introduction, a polished review of the literature, and presentation of the model to be as
studied drawn from the literature review. This phase will include hypotheses or research questions to be examined
and should be at least 7 pages. [10% of grade]. Phase 2 proposals are due in class Wednesday, November 5; Phase
2 presentations will be Wednesday, November 12.
Phase 3 will include an introduction, review of the literature, model, and data and methods description and should be
about 10 - 15 pages. [15% of grade]. Phase 3 proposals are due in class Wednesday, November 19; Phase 3
presentations will be Wednesday, December 3.
The final proposal will be due on the last day of class (Wednesday, December 10). [15% of grade]
Research Paper (continued):
You will present your proposal to the class for discussion and feedback at each phase. You will need to make copies
of your proposal to hand out to other class member, including me (see schedule below). You are then expected to
incorporate suggestions as you improve each draft.
Peer Reviews of Each Phase: EACH class member should read the proposals of his or her classmates and write a
one-page critique (bullet points are fine) for each proposal to give to the proposal author and to me (2 copies for
each proposal read) the day of proposal presentations. [15% of grade]
Peer In-depth Review: In addition to providing one-page critiques on the various phases of your classmates’
papers, you will do an in-depth review of one of your classmates’ Phase 3 proposals. You will approach this critique
as though you are reviewing the paper for a professional journal (with the understanding, obviously, that the results
section will not be available). Although this is not necessarily popular in current reviewing style, your comments
should be directed toward helping the author improve the paper. These reviews will be due on Wednesday,
December 3; you must make two copies: one for the original author and one to turn in to me.
Procedures for Make-Up Exams and Late Work: Late assignments or papers will not be accepted. Incompletes
are strongly discouraged and will be granted only in the case of extreme emergency. Excused absences (for religious
holidays, competitions, or work-related travel) require prior approval of the instructor.
Writing Disclaimer: It is only fair to warn you that my bachelor’s degree is in English, that I have taught English at
a community college, and that I have copy edited for a professional journal. Although I don’t intend to draw up a
grading scheme in which I take off a quarter of a point for each misplaced comma, etc., if you turn in written work
that is sprinkled with misspellings, grammatical errors, malformed sentences, or illogical conclusions, you will be
doing the equivalent of dragging a cheese grater across the back of my neck. If any of the above errors are present in
your work, you are crippling your efforts to make your good points understood, and you will pay the price.
Conduct Expectations: I’d like to think that we can respect each other’s abilities and opinions and can learn from
the variety of experiences we bring to class. There will be many opportunities for discussion in class, so let’s try to
remember that debate is acceptable, but arguments and personal attacks are not. Homophobic, racist, or sexist
comments are not acceptable.
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex discrimination against any participant in an educational
program or activity that receives federal finds. The act is intended to eliminate sex discrimination in education. Title
IX covers discrimination in programs, admissions, activities, and student-to-student sexual harassment. BYU’s
policy against sexual harassment extends not only to employees of the university but to students as well. If you
encounter unlawful sexual harassment or gender based discrimination, please talk to your professor; contact the
Equal Employment Office at 378-5898 or 367-5689 (24-hours); or contact the Honor Code Office at 378-2847.
COURSE SCHEDULE
Wednesday, September 3:
Topic: Research versus Common Sense, or What Is the Shape of Things (Your Research) to
Come?
Wednesday, September 10:
Topic: She Blinded Me with Science (How Do Sociologists View Science?)
Assignment due today:
Diagramming assignment (see handout)
Readings due today:
Schwartz, Barry. 1998. “Postmodernity and Historical Reputation: Abraham Lincoln in Latr TwentiethCentury American Memory.” Social Forces 77(1): 63-103.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00377732%28199809%2977%3A1%3C63%3APAHRAL%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A
Knapp, Stan J. 2002. “Authorizing Family Science: An Analysis of the Objectifying Practices of Family
Science Discourse.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 64: 1038-1048.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118910270/PDFSTART
Edwards, Mark Evan. 2002. “Institutional Barriers to Taking Good Advice: A Comment on ‘Authorizing
Family Science’.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 64: 1048-1051.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118910271/PDFSTART
Sanchez, Laura Ann. 2002. “What Do Social Constructionists Want?” Journal of Marriage and the Family
64: 1051-1058.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118910272/PDFSTART
Larson, Reed. 2002. “Constructing Social Science (Please Read All Warnings Before, During, and After
Use).” Journal of Marriage and the Family 64: 1058-1062.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118910273/PDFSTART
Cohen, Jacob. 1994. “The earth is round (p<.05).” American Psychologist 49: 997-1003.
http://psyphz.psych.wisc.edu/~shackman/Cohen_AmerPsych_1994.pdf
Wednesday, September 17:
Topic: Sociology: The Queen of the Sciences?
Readings due today:
Becker, Howard S. 1958. “Problems of Inference and Proof in Participant Observation.” American
Sociological Review 23(5): 652-660.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28195812%2923%3A6%3C652%3APOIAPI%3E2.0.CO%3B2C
Hargens, Lowell L. 1988. “Scholarly Consensus and Journal Rejection Rates.” American Sociological
Review 53(1): 139-151.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28198802%2953%3A1%3C139%3ASCAJRR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W
Cole, Stephen, Gary Simon, and Jonathan R. Cole. 1988. “Do Journal Rejection Rates Index Consensus?”
American Sociological Review 53(1): 152-156.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28198802%2953%3A1%3C152%3ADJRRIC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3
Hargens, Lowell L. 1988. “Further Evidence on Field Differences in Consensus from the NSF Peer Review
Studies” American Sociological Review 53(1): 157-160.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28198802%2953%3A1%3C157%3AFEOFDI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0
Collins, Randall. 1989. “Sociology: Proscience or Antiscience?” American Sociological Review 54(1): 124139.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28198902%2954%3A1%3C124%3ASPOA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-7
Lieberson, Stanley. 1992. “Einstein, Renoir, and Greeley: Evidence in Sociology.” American Sociological
Review 7: 1-18.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28199202%2957%3A1%3C1%3AERAGST%3E2.0.CO%3B2Y
Wednesday, September 24:
Topic: Ethics AND Literature Reviews
Assignment due today:
Bring Your Article/Book To Work Day!: Come prepared to describe a piece of research you’ve read that
you felt did a particularly good job of presenting a literature review, based on our discussions in class and in
the Rudestam reading. You will bring a one-page discussion (one copy for each class member) of why your
example is a good one.
Readings due today:
Rudestam, Chapters 4 and 12
Peterson, Richard R. 1996. "A Re-evaluation of the Economic Consequences of Divorce." American
Sociological Review 61:528-536.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28199606%2961%3A3%3C528%3AAROTEC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9
Weitzman, Lenore J. 1996. "The Economic Consequences of Divorce are Still Unequal: Comment on
Peterson." American Sociological Review 61:537-538.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28199606%2961%3A3%3C537%3ATECODA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O
Peterson, Richard R. 1996. "Statistical Errors, Faulty Conclusions, Misguided Policy: Reply to Weitzman."
American Sociological Review 61:539-540.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28199606%2961%3A3%3C539%3ASEFCMP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2
Vanderstaay, Steven L.. 2005. “One Hundred Dollars and a Dead Man: Ethical Decision Making in
Ethnographic Fieldwork.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 34: 371-409.
http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/371
ASA Code of Ethics:
http://www.asanet.org/galleries/default-file/Code%20of%20Ethics.pdf
Institutional Review Board (IRB) Guidelines (read all IRB documents linked to from this page):
http://orca.byu.edu/IRB/
Wednesday, October 1:
Topic: What Is A Case?: Units of Analysis
Readings due today:
Rudestam, Chapters 1-3
Kenworthy, Lane. 1999. “Do Social-Welfare Policies Reduce Poverty? A Cross-National Assessment.”
Social Forces 77(3): 1119-1139.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00377732%28199903%2977%3A3%3C1119%3ADSPRPA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
Lucal, Betsy. 1999. “What It Means to Be Gendered Me: Life on the Boundaries of a Dichotomous Gender
System.” Gender and Society 13(6): 781-797.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=08912432%28199912%2913%3A6%3C781%3AWIMTBG%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A
Martin, John Levi. 2005. “Is Power Sexy?” American Journal of Sociology 111: 408–446.
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/432781
Lieberson, Stanley. 1991. “Small N’s and Big Conclusions: An Examination of the Reasoning in
Comparative Studies Based on Small Number of Cases.” Social Forces 70: 307-320
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00377732%28199112%2970%3A2%3C307%3ASNABCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0
Wednesday, October 8:
Topic: Conceptualization and Measurement
Assignment due today:
Phase One proposals (enough copies for all class members)
Readings due today:
Paxton, Pamela. 1999. “Is Social Capital Declining in the United States? A Multiple Indicator Assessment.”
American Journal of Sociology 105(1): 88-127.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9602%28199907%29105%3A1%3C88%3AISCDIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2W
Gibbs, Jack P. 1989. “Conceptualization of Terrorism.” American Sociological Review 54(3): 329-340.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28198906%2954%3A3%3C329%3ACOT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z
Dykema, Jennifer, and Nora Cate Schaeffer. 2000. “Events, Instruments, and Reporting Errors.” American
Sociological Review 65:619-625.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28200008%2965%3A4%3C619%3AEIARE%3E2.0.CO%3B28
Christopher L. Heavey; Brandon M. Larson; Daniel C. Zumtobel; Andrew Christensen. 1996. “The
Communication Patterns Questionnaire: The Reliability and Validity of a Constructive Communication
Subscale.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 58: 796-800.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00222445%28199608%2958%3A3%3C796%3ATCPQTR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-F
Wednesday, October 15:
Phase One Presentation Preparation—NO CLASS
Wednesday, October 22:
Phase One Presentations
Wednesday, October 29:
Topic: Unobtrusive/Archival Research
Readings due today:
Archer, Melanie, and Judith R. Blau. 1993. “Class Formation in Nineteenth Century America: The Case of
the Middle Class.” Annual Review of Sociology 19: 17-41.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360-0572%281993%2919%3C17%3ACFINAT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q
Lauderdale, Diane S. 2006. “Birth Outcomes for Arabic-Named Women in California Before and After
September 11.” Demography 43: 185-201.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/demography/v043/43.1lauderdale.pdf
Downey, Douglas B., Paul T. von Hippel, and Beckett A. Broh. 2004. "Are Schools the Great Equalizer?:
Cognitive Inequality during the Summer Months and the School Year." American Sociological Review 69:
613-635.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28200410%2969%3A5%3C613%3AASTGEC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-L
Hodson, Randy. 1998. “Organizational Ethnographies: An Underutilized Resource in the Sociology of
Work.” Social Forces 76: 1173-1208.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00377732%28199806%2976%3A4%3C1173%3AOEAURI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G
Wednesday, November 5:
Topic: Field Research
Assignment due today:
Phase Two Proposal Copies (enough for all class members)
Readings due today:
Lempert, Richard, and Karl Monsma. 1994. “Cultural Differences and Discrimination: Samoans Before a
Public Housing Eviction Board.” American Sociological Review 59:890-910.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28199412%2959%3A6%3C890%3ACDADSB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
Montemurro, Beth. 2005. “Add Men, Don’t Stir: Reproducing Traditional Gender Roles in Modern
Wedding Showers.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 34: 6-35.
http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/1/6
Rambo, Carol. 2005. “Impressions of Grandmother: An Autoethnographic Portrait.” Journal of
Contemporary Ethnography 34: 560-585.
http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/5/560
De Welde, Kristine. 2003. “Getting Physical: Subverting Gender through Self-Defense.” Journal of
Contemporary Ethnography 32: 247-278.
http://jce.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/32/3/247
Wednesday, November 12:
Phase Two Presentations
Wednesday, November 19:
Topic: The Devil Is In the Details: Methods Sections/Chapters
Assignments due today:
Phase Three Proposals (enough for all class members)
Readings due today:
Rudestam, Chapter 5
Abbott, Andrew, and Alexandra Hrycak. 1990. “Measuring Resemblance in Sequence Data: An Optimal
Matching Analysis of Musicians' Careers.” American Journal of Sociology 96(1): 144-185.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00029602%28199007%2996%3A1%3C144%3AMRISDA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1
Lee, Valerie E., and Anthony S. Bryk. 1994. “A Multilevel Model of the Social Distribution of High School
Achievement.” Sociology of Education 62(3): 172-192.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00380407%28198907%2962%3A3%3C172%3AAMMOTS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-L
Pescosolido, Bernice A., Elizabeth Grauerholz, and Melissa A. Milkie. 1997. “Culture and Conflict: The
Portrayal of Blacks in U.S. Children's Picture Books Through the Mid- and Late-Twentieth Century.”
American Sociological Review 62(3): 443-464.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00031224%28199706%2962%3A3%3C443%3ACACTPO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
Rafaeli, Anat, Jane Dutton, Celia V. Harquail, and Stephanie Mackie-Lewis. 1997. “Navigating by Attire:
The Use of Dress by Female Administrative Employees.” Academy of Management Journal 40(1): 9-45.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-4273%28199702%2940%3A1%3C9%3ANBATUO%3E2.0.CO%3B2H
Keith, Verna M., and Cedric Herring. 1991. “Skin Tone and Stratification in the Black Community.”
American Journal of Sociology 97(3): 760-778.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9602%28199111%2997%3A3%3C760%3ASTASIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2C
Wednesday, November 29:
UNIVERSITY HOLIDAY, NO CLASS
Wednesday, December 3:
Phase Three Presentations
Assignment due today:
Peer Review Due to Peer and to Professor
Wednesday, December 10:
Topic: Science Isn’t Science ‘Til You Give It Away: Writing, Publishing, and
Results/Conclusions Sections
Assignment due today:
Final research paper
Readings due today:
Rudestam, Chapters 6, 8-11
Monday, December 15:
Final Exam: DUE to Professor Dufur’s Mailbox in 2008 JFSB by 6:00pm
CLASS SCHEDULE
DATE
September 3
September 10
September 17
TOPIC
Introduction: Research versus
Common Sense, or What Is the
Shape of Things (Your Research)
to Come?
She Blinded Me with Science
(How Do Sociologists View
Science?)
Sociology: The Queen of the
Sciences?
September 24
Ethics AND Literature Reviews
October 1
What Is a Case?: Units of
Analysis
October 8
Conceptualization and
Measurement
October 15
October 22
October 29
Phase One Presentation
Preparation—NO CLASS
Phase One Presentations
Unobtrusive/Archival Research
November 5
Field Research
November 12
November 19
Phase Two Presentations
The Devil Is In the Details:
Methods Sections/Chapters
November 26
December 3
December 10
University Holiday—NO CLASS
Phase Three Presentations
Science Isn’t Science ‘Til You
Give It Away: Writing,
Publishing, and
Results/Conclusions Sections
EXAMS
December 15
READINGS DUE
WRITTEN
ASSIGNMENTS DUE
None (lucky you!)
Schwartz, Rose, Knapp,
Sanchez, Larson, Burawoy,
Cohen
Becker, Hargens, Cole,
Hargens (again), Collins,
Lovaglia, Lieberson, Tilly
Rudestam (Chapters 4 and
12), Peterson, Weitzman,
Peterson (again), Ferris,
Vanderstaay, ASA Code of
Ethics, Institutional Review
Board (IRB) Guidelines
Rudestam (Chapters 1-3);
Kenworthy; Lucal; Carpentier,
Normand, and White; Nakao
and Treas; Martin; Gerring;
Lieberson.
Paxton; Gibbs; Dykema and
Schaeffer; Heavey, Larson,
Zumtobel, and Christensen;
Schaeffer and Presser.
Diagramming
assignment
Peers’ Phase One proposals
Archer and Blau; Lauderdale;
Downey, von Hippel, and
Broh; Soule and King; Adut;
Hodson
Lempert and Monsma;
Bechky; Smilde; Montemurro;
Rambo; De Welde
Peers’ Phase Two proposals
Rudestam (Chapter 5); Abbott
and Hrycak; Lee and Bryk;
Pescosolido, Grauerholz, and
Milkie; Rafaeli, Dutton,
Harquail, and Mackie-Lewis;
Keith and Herring; Merten,;
Theberge
Peer comments
Peers’ Phase Three proposals
Rudestam (Chapters 6, 8-11)
Peer comments
Final research proposal
Everything!
Final exam due @ 6PM
Note that written questions on articles are due every class period.
Bring Your Article to
Work Day
Phase One proposal
Phase Two proposal
Peer comments
Phase Three proposal
How to Diagram a Research Article
Remember diagramming a sentence in grade school? In diagramming a sentence, you identified structural
elements of that sentence. Fast forward to the present. The task is still the same when you diagram a
research article: identify structural elements of a research paper.
There are two primary goals to diagramming a research article. First, diagramming a research article
significantly enhances your understanding of the theory, methods, and substantive findings of an article,
as well as the article’s location within the larger body of sociological literature. Second, diagramming a
research article helps you understand how articles are organized and constructed and, thus, will aid you
in writing up your own research paper.
Your diagrams should be in outline form and identify the following components of a research paper.
Your diagrams should not exceed 3-4 pages.
1. Research question(s) asked
2. Sociological significance (i.e., how the paper is packaged as important to sociology)
3. Theories used to address the research question
4. Hypotheses to be tested (generally at the concept level)
5. How the hypotheses and concepts are operationalized (i.e., what are the dependent and independent
variables and how are they measured?)
6. The data used to test the hypotheses and thus to answer the research question (sampling method,
sample, data source, etc....)
7. Unit(s) of analysis
8. Method(s), statistical or otherwise, used to analyze the data
9. Primary findings and conclusions about the research question asked
10. Future research and unresolved issues, including what research ideas this study suggests to you
An example of distinguishing among concepts, variables, measures, sample, and data (taken from Baldi
and McBrier 1997):
CONCEPT
Career
mobility
VARIABLE
Promotion
opportunity
MEASURE
Did worker
receive any
promotion
while working
for this firm
(yes/no)
SAMPLE
396 workers
employed in
organizations
with at least
2 workers
DATA
1991 matched
General Social
Survey/National
Organizations
Study
You may select your own research article to diagram; please note that this article should come from a reputable sociological
source. The readings listed in your syllabus are a good jumping-off point. Good sources for articles include but are not limited to
American Journal of Sociology, American Sociological Review, Work and Occupations, Sociology of Education, Social
Psychology Quarterly, Social Forces, Social Problems, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Criminology, Journal of Sport and
Social Issues, Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, Sociological Quarterly, Sociological Forum, and Sociological Focus. If
you like an article from a different journal than those mentioned here, you might want to e-mail and run it past me.