Theories are argumentsThey summarize evidence (induction)They generate hypotheses and other implications (deduction)They begin by collection clues into a first suspicion or hypothesis (abduction)The type of methodology – quantitative, critical, qualitative – doesn’t matter in these respectsArgument as MethodUse methodology to test theoryActually, method is an argumentAs an example, which is the better design?Argument = methodSecond design (two group no-pretest experiment) is better than first (one shot case study)For reasons (arguments) that you can find in a design bookComparison versus intuitive sense; control; comparable groups; etcThese reasons have been workedExamples of argumentative conclusions in social scienceResults shouldn’t depend on the investigatorData and procedures should be publicComparisons are requiredThings that happen 5% by chance aren’t realNeed 70% reliability in measurement“Formal research procedures are nothing more than a codification of the principles of critical thought.” (an essay I wrote)follow instructions and avoid fatal criticismsNeed theory and dataTheory offers premisesData can test and extend the premisesConclusions are new theoryEx:Theory says A causes BData say A causes B, but only for malesConclusion: need a theory that includes A and B, and also distinguishes male from female experience of A and BArguing toward theoryTheory and data should be of high qualityTheory’s quality (this whole class)Truth, beauty, and justiceWhat are high quality data?DataAuthentic (reliable and valid)Even recognizing the phenomena is not simple; oprerationalization can be controversial (eg, relational happiness – scale? Duration? Observers’ judgment?)Investigator interpretative or distanced? (eg, data from respondents’ point of view or quasi-objective?)Good arguments may not be conclusiveWhy is social science tentative?If H is true, Data will show X;The data show X;So, H is trueBut this is invalid (affirming the consequent)If P then Q; (if you’re rich, then you’re happy)Q; (you’re happy)So P (you’re rich)So we try to falsify (Popper), not verify (Logical Positivism)The more falsification efforts something survives, the more confidence we have in itThe is a community argumentLave & March, Intro to Models in the Social SciencesCh. 1: What We Are Up To“pleasures of thinking about human behavior”book is about “invention of conjectures”imagination, speculation (with some discipline)Model (=Theory, etc)“A simplified picture of a part of the real world”will have some veridical features but not allso can have several models of the same thingwilling to accept as synonyms: theory, paradigm, hypothesis, ideaHow to do itNecessary skills (req practice)Abstract from realityDerive implications from modelEvaluate a model:AccuracyMoralityAestheticFamiliarity with common modelsArgument as Method“Formal research procedures are nothing more than a codification of the principles of critical thought.” (an essay I wrote)follow instructions and avoid fatal criticismsThe Four Models in this book:Individual choice - rational choice under risk (reaction to persuasive messages)Exchange – trade resources, cost/benefit (relationship maintenance)Adaptation – probability learning model (change – relational, attitudinal, personal, development)Diffusion – spread of atts, behs thru society. (rumors, fads, opinions)Why it’s Fun“an elementary property of human beings: Man [sic] is capable of producing more complex behavior than he is capable of understanding.”This is the source of the pleasure of social science, and of the aesthetic appeal (ie, coolness factor) of models and theoriesSome examplesCan we find things about communication that aren’t obvious or true by definition?Notice how many things are really true by definitionEg, ethos (credibility) is defined as “those qualities of a speaker that make him or her believable” – Aristotle, RhetoricSo “finding out” that high credibility speakers are more persuasive doesn’t prove muchExample 1 (Credibility)Observation : sometimes higher credibility doesn’t make a speaker more persuasiveAny immediate explanations?Possible ExplanationsUnder conditions of high motivation or involvement, the audience scrutinizes the message and isn’t affected by speaker characteristicsSometimes there’s a ceiling effect, so more persuasion isn’t possibleSometimes there’s a cellar effect, so that no persuasion is possible at allExample 2Maybe it’s actually genetic – DNA, etcMaybe it’s a survival thing:Men could survive by fighting well, but:Women had to be able to foresee dangerMaybe it’s a cultural thing:Women expected to do family maintenanceWomen always in charge of intimate relationships, so have more experienceExample 2Notice that this example, dealing with delicate issues of sex and gender, raises questions of morality and justiceWould we consider a model that implied that women should stay at home? That men have no family maintenance responsibilities?Would we be willing to say, “that’s just a bad theory”?Our Goals for Communication TheoryAccuracy: a better understanding of our worldAesthetic: some theories are “cooler” than othersMorality: social science should aim at making a better worldLave & MarchCh. 2: An Introduction to SpeculationIntro to SpeculationGeneral method: observe, then speculateAbductive inference:A, B, and C happenedProcess P would explain A, B, and CSo maybe P is going onIntro to SpeculationEx 1:Observe: Friends live nearby in residence hallsSpeculate 1: Friends ask to live nearbyThis would, in fact, account for the dataWhat further consequences would there be?Not, what’s the evidence that this happened?Intro to SpeculationFurther consequences:Should be more pronounced in a jr/sr dorm than a freshman dormBut it isn’t. So speculate again.Speculate 2: Students are mostly friendship-able with one another, so simple opportunity to interact is all that’s requiredIntro to SpeculationAccounts for prior data:Clusters of friends in dormsEqual effects in frosh/soph/jr/sr dormsFurther consequences: since freq of contact increases over time, should find friendship clusters growing larger thru the school yearTest this easilyIntro to SpeculationSuppose we’ve accounted for college student friendship patterns.Now we want to generalize the model, to make it more interestingBegin by identifying parts of the model that restrict it: eg, “student,”