Use when deciding whether an idea is a genuine theoretical problem and a fit for Sociological Theory (ST) rather than an empirical study or a review essay. Screens the problem and venue fit; it does NOT build the theory (soctheory-theory-construction) or position it in a tradition (soctheory-literature-positioning).
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill soctheory-topic-selection --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Soctheory Topic Selection?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-soctheory-topic-selection)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: soctheory-topic-selection
description: Use when deciding whether an idea is a genuine theoretical problem and a fit for Sociological Theory (ST) rather than an empirical study or a review essay. Screens the problem and venue fit; it does NOT build the theory (soctheory-theory-construction) or position it in a tradition (soctheory-literature-positioning).
---
# Topic Selection: Is There a Real Theoretical Problem? (soctheory-topic-selection)
## When to trigger
- You have an interesting phenomenon, intuition, or critique but no theory yet
- You are unsure whether the idea belongs at ST or at an empirical/specialist venue
- A draft exists but you cannot state, in one sentence, what theoretical work it does
- You suspect the "theory" is really a literature review or an empirical finding in disguise
## What counts as an ST-fit theoretical problem
ST publishes work "in all areas of theory" — 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). A fit problem is one where the deliverable is a **conceptual
advance**: existing theory cannot see, name, or explain something, and your paper supplies the
concept, mechanism, distinction, or reconstruction that lets it. Abend's "The Meaning of
'Theory'" (ST 2008, 26(2):173–199) is the discipline-level reminder that "theory" is several
things at once — be explicit about which you are doing.
| Kind of theory work (Abend-style) | What the paper delivers | ST-fit? |
|-----------------------------------|-------------------------|---------|
| New substantive theory | new concepts + mechanisms explaining a domain | Yes |
| History of theory | a re-reading of a tradition that changes how we use it | Yes |
| Metatheory | clarifying the logic/warrant of a kind of explanation | Yes |
| Formal theory construction | an explicit, sometimes formalized, derivation of propositions | Yes |
| Synthetic contribution | bridging two traditions to produce new theory | Yes |
| Empirical test of a hypothesis | a finding from data | No → ASR / AJS |
| Literature review | a map of what others said | No → Annual Review of Sociology |
## The four screening questions
1. **Is there a theoretical problem, not just a topic?** "Trust" is a topic; "existing theories
treat trust as either calculative or moral, and cannot account for trust that is
simultaneously both" is a problem.
2. **Is the contribution conceptual, not empirical?** If the punchline is "X causes Y in this
sample," it is an ASR/AJS paper. At ST the punchline is "here is a better way to think about
X and Y."
3. **Does it engage a live tradition?** ST theory intervenes in an ongoing conversation
(field theory, pragmatism, mechanisms, cultural sociology, Bourdieu, Luhmann, relational
sociology), not in a vacuum. (Develop this with `soctheory-literature-positioning`.)
4. **Can data stay illustrative?** ST permits examples and cases to *illustrate* a concept, but
they must never be the *test*. If you need a sample to make the claim true, the project is empirical.
## Sibling-venue map (route off ST if the fit is wrong)
| If the project is really… | Send it to | Why not ST |
|---------------------------|------------|------------|
| An empirical test / causal estimate | ASR or AJS | ST does not test hypotheses |
| A methods/measurement advance | Sociological Methodology / SMR | ST is substantive/metatheory, not method |
| A comprehensive field survey | Annual Review of Sociology | ST wants a theoretical move, not a map |
| Historically grounded macro-process theory | Theory and Society (close sibling) | ST leans conceptual/analytic; T&S leans historical-comparative |
| Continental social theory essay | European Journal of Social Theory | ST is the ASA's analytically pluralist venue |
ST is the **ASA's dedicated theory journal**; do not confuse it with these neighbors.
## Checklist
- [ ] The problem is stated as a tension existing theory cannot resolve (not a topic)
- [ ] The contribution is conceptual, not an empirical finding
- [ ] The kind of theory work is named (substantive / history / metatheory / formal / synthetic)
- [ ] A live tradition or conversation is identifiable for the intervention
- [ ] Any data is illustrative, never the test
- [ ] The project is not a better fit for ASR / AJS / Sociological Methodology / ARS / Theory and Society
## Anti-patterns
- A "topic" ("emotions," "the state") presented as if it were a theoretical problem
- An empirical paper relabeled as theory by removing the regression table but keeping the test logic
- A literature review with no original theoretical move
- "Applying" an existing theory to a new case with no change to the theory itself
- Inventing a problem no tradition recognizes, so no reviewer can place the stakes
## Output format
```
【Theoretical problem】[the tension existing theory cannot resolve]
【Kind of theory work】substantive / history of theory / metatheory / formal / synthetic
【ST-fit】yes / no → [route to ASR / AJS / SM / ARS / Theory and Society]
【Tradition to engage】[name]
【Data role】illustrative only / none
【Next step】soctheory-literature-positioning
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!