soctheory-workflow

Sociological Theory Workflow (soctheory-workflow)

Overview

This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill — it tells you **which

soctheory- skill to use at the current stage* of a Sociological Theory (ST) manuscript.

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as **Sociological

Theory, the American Sociological Association's (ASA) dedicated theory journal**, published

by SAGE. ST publishes work "in all areas of theory, including new substantive theories,

history of theory, metatheory, formal theory construction, and synthetic contributions"

(submission guidelines, 检索于 2026-06；以官网为准). The deliverable is a **conceptual

advance** — a new concept, a sharpened mechanism, a typology, a reconstruction of a tradition,

or a metatheoretical clarification. There is **no hypothesis-testing, no estimation, and no

results section: data, when present at all, is illustrative**, never a test. If the project

hinges on identifying a causal effect in a dataset, it belongs at ST's empirical siblings

(American Sociological Review, American Journal of Sociology), not at ST.

Two reference points keep the bar in view at every stage. **Gabriel Abend's "The Meaning of

'Theory'"** (ST 2008, 26(2):173–199) shows that "theory" means several distinct things in

sociology — be explicit about which kind you are doing. **Isaac Reed's "Justifying

Sociological Knowledge"** (ST 2008, 26(2):101–129) shows that the warrant for a theoretical

claim is itself a theoretical commitment. References follow the ASA Style Guide (author-date).

When to trigger

• The user asks "what should I do next?" on a theory paper
• A draft arrives and you must locate its bottleneck (problem? concept? argument? contribution?)
• Work is thrashing between theorizing, diagram-building, and prose
• An ST decision letter has arrived and the work shifts to revision

Routing table

| Current symptom | Next skill |

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

| Idea is vague; not sure there is a real theoretical problem | soctheory-topic-selection |

| Have a problem but concepts/mechanisms/propositions are not built | soctheory-theory-construction |

| Unsure which tradition or conversation you are intervening in | soctheory-literature-positioning|

| Propositions exist but the chain of reasoning is missing or shaky | soctheory-argument-development |

| Theory over-reaches; scope and domain are unstated | soctheory-boundary-conditions |

| Need a typology / mechanism diagram / process figure (not a table) | soctheory-conceptual-exhibits |

| Prose reads like a literature review, not an argument | soctheory-writing-style |

| Cannot say what new way of seeing the theory provides | soctheory-contribution-framing |

| Want to understand ST's double-anonymous, multi-round review | soctheory-review-process |

| Ready to submit; need the Manuscript Central preflight | soctheory-submission |

| Received an R&R; need to write the response document | soctheory-rebuttal |

Default order

1. soctheory-topic-selection — lock the theoretical problem (what existing theory cannot see)
2. soctheory-literature-positioning — name the tradition/conversation you intervene in
3. soctheory-theory-construction — build concepts, mechanisms, propositions
4. soctheory-argument-development — make the reasoning valid; engage rival theories
5. soctheory-boundary-conditions — state scope, domain, and what the theory does NOT claim
6. soctheory-conceptual-exhibits — typology / mechanism diagram / process figure
7. soctheory-contribution-framing — the new way of seeing; the "before → after"
8. soctheory-writing-style — ASA Style Guide; argument-driven prose (polish)
9. soctheory-submission — Manuscript Central preflight
10. soctheory-review-process — understand the review you are about to enter
11. soctheory-rebuttal — after the R&R

> soctheory-writing-style is a late-stage polish. Do not polish prose before the argument

> is valid (soctheory-argument-development) and the contribution is named

> (soctheory-contribution-framing).

Session gate sheet

Open each ST work session by filling this sheet; the first blank or "no" is the route.

Gate 0 is ST-specific: a manuscript that cannot name its kind of theory will drift.

SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY — SESSION GATE SHEET
Gate 0  Which sense of "theory" (Abend 2008) is this paper doing?  kind: ______________
Gate 1  What existing theory cannot see is stated ............. soctheory-topic-selection
Gate 2  Tradition / conversation intervened in is named ....... soctheory-literature-positioning
Gate 3  Concepts, mechanisms, propositions are built .......... soctheory-theory-construction
Gate 4  Chain of reasoning valid; rivals engaged .............. soctheory-argument-development
Gate 5  Scope + domain stated; over-reach trimmed ............. soctheory-boundary-conditions
Gate 6  Typology / mechanism / process figure drafted ......... soctheory-conceptual-exhibits
Gate 7  The new way of seeing is nameable (before -> after) ... soctheory-contribution-framing
Gate 8  Prose argues; ASA author-date style throughout ........ soctheory-writing-style
Gate 9  Manuscript Central preflight complete ................. soctheory-submission
Gate 10 Double-anonymous multi-round review understood ........ soctheory-review-process
Gate 11 R&R response revises the THEORY, then the letter ...... soctheory-rebuttal

Standing rule: Gates 6–8 wait on Gate 4; data mentioned anywhere stays illustrative, never a test.

Decision shortcuts

• "I have an interesting phenomenon but no theory" → soctheory-topic-selection
• "I don't know whose tradition I'm arguing with" → soctheory-literature-positioning
• "My propositions read like assertions" → soctheory-theory-construction then soctheory-argument-development
• "A reviewer will say the theory claims too much" → soctheory-boundary-conditions
• "My figure is boxes and arrows with no mechanism" → soctheory-conceptual-exhibits
• "A reviewer will ask 'what's new here?'" → soctheory-contribution-framing
• "It reads like a review essay" → soctheory-writing-style
• "I'm about to hit submit" → soctheory-submission
• "I got a Major/Minor Revision" → soctheory-review-process then soctheory-rebuttal

Differences vs. ASR / AJS empirical skill stacks

If the manuscript identifies an effect in data and the contribution is the finding, an

empirical-sociology stack (ASR / AJS) fits better. The core split:

• Sociological Theory: builds theory; the contribution IS the conceptual advance; data

illustrative only; propositions, not hypotheses tested.

• ASR / AJS: test or demonstrate empirically; samples, measures, estimation, results.

ST is also not Theory and Society, the European Journal of Social Theory, or

Sociological Methodology — it is the ASA's flagship for theory proper (see

soctheory-topic-selection for the sibling-venue map).

Anti-patterns

• Do not skip soctheory-literature-positioning and jump to building — reviewers first ask whose tradition you are in.
• Do not let soctheory-conceptual-exhibits pretty up a diagram before the mechanism exists.
• Do not let soctheory-rebuttal draft a response before the theory itself has been revised.
• Do not treat ST as a venue for an empirical test; route hypothesis-testing to ASR/AJS.

> Volatile specifics (exact fee, word limit, ASA Style edition, portal) change — see

> resources/official-source-map.md and confirm on the official ST / SAGE author page. The

> 2024–2026 co-editor team is identified in the source map (verified 2026-06-22), but editors

> rotate (next term begins 2027-01-01), so re-confirm the slate before naming editors.