Session 9 - Step 2 in TCM

We do the second step of TCM of our chosen theory: Identify relevant phenomena

1 Reminder: TCM steps

  1. Identify definitions of constructs and relevant phenomena
  2. TODAY: Formulate a prototheory: Create a VAST display
  3. Develop a formal model
  4. Check the adequacy of the formal model
  5. Evaluate the overall worth of the constructed theory

2 TCM Step 2: Formulate a prototheory / Sketch the existing verbal theory

Goal: Capture the core theoretical relationships - as proposed by the original authors - in a VAST display.

2.1 Concrete steps

  1. Search the literature for theoretical statements about relationships between constructs (only our focal constructs).
  2. Deliverable 1:
    • Enter the theoretical statements in a table
      • Do this in a granular way: each table cell/box should only contain a single statement (which later get connected with different types of relationships). You can split long original sentences into separate atomic statements.
      • Back up all decisions with evidence (e.g., with direct quotes) or justifications (e.g., for deviations from the literature, or when the literature is ambiguous, or when you had to fill a gap). These justifications go into a narrative text that accompanies the VAST display.
    • Assign a unique ID to each statement. In the VAST display, add the ID to each relationship.
    • When you have to extend the original theory, or make some relationships more precise, add the new statements to the table, clearly indicate that this is a new statement from you, and also give it an ID.
  3. Deliverable 2: Extend your existing VAST display. Concerning the arrows, make use of all possible relationship types (where appropriate). Not just “naming (n)” and “causation (c)”, but also:
    • Conceptual Implication (i)
    • Transformation (t)
    • Prediction (p)
    • Reasoning (r)
    Try to model the actual mechanisms and to avoid too big black boxes; e.g., what component of attitudes is exactly supposed to be manipulated?
  4. Deliverable 3: Write a short paragraph with a meta-assessment of the task: How easy / feasible was it to find and extract the theoretical statements, and to convert them into a VAST display? What were the hurdles? What features of the primary literature were (not) helpful?

2.1.1 Example

2.1.1.1 Table with definitions, statements, and IDs

ID Quote Reference Type of relationship Comment
A Mental imagery are “representations and the accompanying experience of sensory information without a direct external stimulus” Pearson et al. 2015, p. 590 n (naming/ definition)
B mental imagery = mental simulation = MI (no reference: We inferred that from the text) n two exchangeable naming relationships for the same construct “MI”
C “Imagined intergroup contact is the mental simulation of a social interaction with a member or members of an outgroup category.” Crisp & Turner, 2009, p. 234 conceptual implication i

2.1.1.2 VAST display

The corresponding IDs from the “statement table” are shown in parentheses at each relationship arrow.

2.1.2 Notes:

A conceptual implication contains multiple cases:

  • hierarchical relationships between categories (being a dog conceptually implies being an animal)
  • but also attributes: Being a “sun” conceptually implies “being hot”