3.6. Linking Theory and Data

As we wrap up this chapter, let’s review the ways that data and theories are relevant to sociological research methods. We sociologists employ diverse theories, levels of analysis, and analytical procedures in our work. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each of these approaches is crucial not only for successfully conducting research, but also for responsibly reading and evaluating the work of others.

First, our choice of a level of analysis and a particular type of data will shape what we ask about the social world and how we ask it. A micro-level study of gangs will look much different than a macro-level study of gangs. In some cases, you could apply multiple levels of analysis to your investigation, but doing so isn’t always practical. Therefore, it’s crucial to understand the different levels of analysis, be aware of which level you happen to be employing, and recognize the inevitable advantages and disadvantages of that choice. Your theoretical perspective will also shape your study. The theory you invoke will influence not only the way a question about a topic is asked, but also which topic gets investigated in the first place. Likewise, the possible answers you find to the questions you pose will be constrained by your choice of an overarching paradigm.

Second, it is important to recognize the fact that good research requires you to be proficient in both theory and methodology. Methodological skills—which we will describe throughout the second half of this book—can be boiled down to knowing how best to measure and evaluate data. Social sciences make progress as individual scientists develop more sophisticated ways of counting and describing the world, and you as a researcher can make important contributions by being creative in this regard. In contrast, being “skilled” at theory means that you know the real significance of whatever empirical findings you uncover in your research. You as a theorist will advance social science by developing concepts and identifying patterns that explain the world more fully or accurately.

Having deficits in either your methodological or theoretical skills is a major problem. At times, students with brilliant theoretical minds stumble as sociologists because they don’t know or appreciate the nuts and bolts of research methods. They create studies with obvious flaws in logic, or they fail (because of ignorance or laziness) to gather the data they need to confirm or disconfirm their pet theories. Generally speaking, though, theory tends to be considerably harder to master than methodology, requiring years of reading, observation, and reflection. Provocative theories can also revolutionize the field in ways that a competently done, but narrowly theorized, study cannot. The greatest scientists in history—from the earliest astronomers, chemists, and physicists, to the major social scientists of modern times—are usually held in awe for the theories they postulated that transformed the course of science. Strong methodological skills are needed to be an ordinary researcher, but strong theoretical skills are needed to be an extraordinary researcher.