Poq Theory And Hypotheses

Theory & Hypotheses (poq-theory-and-hypotheses)

At POQ a result is not a contribution until it is attached to a clear claim — about how opinion forms or moves, how communication shapes it, or how a survey-design choice affects measurement. This skill turns findings into theory: explicit constructs, mechanisms, and falsifiable hypotheses, in the idiom appropriate to a substantive or a methodological paper.

When to trigger

• The empirics are strong but the "so what / why" is thin
• A reviewer said the paper is "atheoretical," "ad hoc," or "just a finding"
• You need to state constructs, mechanisms, and hypotheses explicitly
• A methods paper needs a precise claim about which survey-error source it addresses

Build the argument (by kind of paper)

Substantive opinion / communication paper

1. Concept — define the attitude, behavior, or communication construct precisely; distinguish it from neighbors (attitude vs. non-attitude, opinion vs. knowledge, exposure vs. reception).
2. Mechanism — the process: how information, identity, framing, or context moves the opinion.
3. Hypotheses — directional, falsifiable predictions tied to the mechanism, with the null that a rival account or measurement artifact would imply.
4. Scope conditions — population, period, and context where the claim holds.

Survey-methodology paper

• State the survey-error source at issue (coverage, nonresponse, measurement, mode, weighting) and the specific bias or variance claim you make about it.
• Frame the hypothesis in Total Survey Error terms: which error component changes, in which direction, under which design choice.
• Distinguish predictions unique to your account from those a competing methods explanation shares.

The measurement-validity test (POQ-specific)

For the central construct, write one sentence: "My measure captures ___ and not ___; if it were instead picking up a measurement artifact (wording / order / mode / nonresponse), I would see ___." If you cannot, the construct is not yet pinned down — strengthen measurement before hypothesizing.

Anti-patterns

• "Hypothesizing after results are known" (HARKing) — state hypotheses before tests; preregister where possible
• Treating a survey artifact (wording, order, mode) as if it were a substantive opinion effect
• Mechanisms named but never made observable / testable
• Universal claims with no scope conditions or population
• A methods paper with no explicit claim about which error source it improves

Theory pass for Public Opinion Quarterly

Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the public-opinion construct, sampling frame, mode effects, weighting/nonresponse plan, and trend or causal interpretation; then test whether the manuscript addresses survey and public-opinion reviewers who inspect measurement, sampling, mode, nonresponse, and inference about attitudes or behavior.

• Primary move: Link every hypothesis to a mechanism, rival account, boundary condition, and observable implication; drop hypotheses that only restate correlations.
• Decision ledger: return claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
• Sibling comparison: compare against Political Analysis for methods-first work, Journal of Politics for political-science theory, Communication Research for media-effects framing; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
• Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.

Output format

【Kind】substantive-opinion / survey-methodology
【Core claim】one sentence
【Construct(s)】defined + distinguished from neighbors
【Mechanism / error source】the process or the TSE component at issue
【Hypotheses】directional + the null / artifact alternative
【Scope conditions】population / period / context
【Next】poq-survey-design-and-measurement

Supplementary resources

• ../../resources/external_tools.md — measurement, scaling, and TSE references
• ../../resources/official-source-map.md — POQ scope and contribution expectations

Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Public-Opinion-Quarterly-Skills/skills/poq-theory-and-hypotheses/SKILL.md