--- name: soctheory-workflow description: Use when deciding which soctheory-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a Sociological Theory manuscript from theoretical-problem framing through peer-review revision for a Sociological Theory (ST) submission. Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills. --- # 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. ```text 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.