soctheory-conceptual-exhibits

Conceptual Exhibits: Typologies, Mechanism Diagrams, Process Models (soctheory-conceptual-exhibits)

When to trigger

• The theory is built and you need a figure or typology to make it legible
• Your figure is "boxes and arrows" with no readable mechanism
• A typology's cells are not all distinct, defined concepts
• You are tempted to include a data plot or a results table (ST has neither)

> Every exhibit at ST is conceptual. There are no regression tables, no scatterplots, no

> coefficient figures — ST does not test, so it has nothing to plot. The exhibit must carry

> theoretical work: it shows a mechanism, a process, or a classification that the prose alone

> conveys less clearly.

The exhibit types ST uses

| Exhibit | Carries | Design rule |

|---------|---------|-------------|

| Mechanism diagram | the social process linking concepts | every arrow is a stated mechanism, not a vague "influences" |

| Process model | sequence/feedback over time | each stage is a defined concept; loops are theorized, not decorative |

| Typology (2x2 / nxm) | a classification along dimensions | dimensions are clearly named; every cell is a distinct, defined type |

| Concept map | the relations among a concept family | hierarchy/overlap shown deliberately; no orphan nodes |

| Comparison table | this theory vs. rivals, conceptually | rows are theoretical properties, never empirical results |

Design discipline (the "earn its keep" test)

A conceptual exhibit must do work the prose cannot do as efficiently. Before including it, pass

all three tests:

1. Readability test. Can a reader reconstruct the core argument from the figure plus its

caption alone? If not, it is decoration.

1. Concept test. Is every box/cell/node a concept that is defined in the text and labeled

identically? A box with an undefined label is a hole in the theory.

1. Mechanism test. Does every arrow / transition name the mechanism it represents? "A → B"

with no mechanism is exactly the failure soctheory-theory-construction warns against,

reproduced graphically.

Typology construction

A good ST typology is a theoretical claim, not a filing system:

• The dimensions must be conceptually motivated (why these two axes?), not convenient.
• Every cell must be a real, distinct type — name it and define it; an empty or forced cell

signals the dimensions are wrong.

• The typology should generate propositions (e.g., types in cell 3 behave differently

because of mechanism M), tying back to soctheory-theory-construction.

• Watch scope: a typology that implies coverage beyond the stated domain over-claims (see

soctheory-boundary-conditions).

Propositions table (optional, for proposition-heavy papers)

If the paper has many propositions, a compact table listing P1…Pn with their one-line

mechanisms helps reviewers track the theory. It is a theoretical table — propositions and

mechanisms only, never coefficients or significance.

Format notes

• Figures should meet the publisher's resolution/format requirements; confirm exact specs on

the SAGE/ST author page (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).

• Figures and tables count toward ST's overall length limit (all material is inclusive of the

word cap; see soctheory-writing-style / soctheory-submission), so an exhibit must earn its

space against the cap, not just against the page.

Checklist

• [ ] Every exhibit is conceptual (mechanism / process / typology / concept map / theory-comparison)
• [ ] No data plot, scatterplot, coefficient figure, or results table anywhere
• [ ] Each box/cell/node is a concept defined in the text with an identical label
• [ ] Each arrow/transition names its mechanism
• [ ] The figure passes the readability test (argument recoverable from figure + caption)
• [ ] Typology dimensions are motivated and every cell is a distinct, defined type
• [ ] Exhibits respect the stated boundary conditions and the word/length cap

Anti-patterns

• Boxes-and-arrows with undefined labels or unlabeled arrows
• A data plot or regression table imported from an empirical template (impossible at ST)
• A 2x2 with a forced or empty cell, revealing mis-chosen dimensions
• A figure that merely restates a sentence, adding nothing
• Labels in the figure that differ from the concept names in the text
• A typology that implies coverage outside the theory's domain

Output format

【Exhibit type】mechanism diagram / process model / typology / concept map / theory-comparison
【Concepts in exhibit】all defined in text + identically labeled: yes / fix [...]
【Arrows】each names a mechanism: yes / fix [...]
【Readability test】argument recoverable from figure+caption: yes / no
【Typology】dimensions motivated; every cell distinct: yes / n/a
【Next step】soctheory-contribution-framing