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).

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 (current editorial team, exact fee, word limit, ASA Style edition, portal) change or could not be machine-verified — see resources/official-source-map.md and confirm on the official ST / SAGE author page (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).