theory in a research paper

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Theoretical Framework
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge within the limits of critical bounded assumptions or predictions of behavior. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework encompasses not just the theory, but the narrative explanation about how the researcher engages in using the theory and its underlying assumptions to investigate the research problem. It is the structure of your paper that summarizes concepts, ideas, and theories derived from prior research studies and which was synthesized in order to form a conceptual basis for your analysis and interpretation of meaning found within your research.

Abend, Gabriel. "The Meaning of Theory." Sociological Theory 26 (June 2008): 173–199; Kivunja, Charles. "Distinguishing between Theory, Theoretical Framework, and Conceptual Framework: A Systematic Review of Lessons from the Field." International Journal of Higher Education 7 (December 2018): 44-53; Swanson, Richard A. Theory Building in Applied Disciplines . San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers 2013; Varpio, Lara, Elise Paradis, Sebastian Uijtdehaage, and Meredith Young. "The Distinctions between Theory, Theoretical Framework, and Conceptual Framework." Academic Medicine 95 (July 2020): 989-994.

Importance of Theory and a Theoretical Framework

Theories can be unfamiliar to the beginning researcher because they are rarely applied in high school social studies curriculum and, as a result, can come across as unfamiliar and imprecise when first introduced as part of a writing assignment. However, in their most simplified form, a theory is simply a set of assumptions or predictions about something you think will happen based on existing evidence and that can be tested to see if those outcomes turn out to be true. Of course, it is slightly more deliberate than that, therefore, summarized from Kivunja (2018, p. 46), here are the essential characteristics of a theory.

• It is logical and coherent
• It has clear definitions of terms or variables, and has boundary conditions [i.e., it is not an open-ended statement]
• It has a domain where it applies
• It has clearly described relationships among variables
• It describes, explains, and makes specific predictions
• It comprises of concepts, themes, principles, and constructs
• It must have been based on empirical data [i.e., it is not a guess]
• It must have made claims that are subject to testing, been tested and verified
• It must be clear and concise
• Its assertions or predictions must be different and better than those in existing theories
• Its predictions must be general enough to be applicable to and understood within multiple contexts
• Its assertions or predictions are relevant, and if applied as predicted, will result in the predicted outcome
• The assertions and predictions are not immutable, but subject to revision and improvement as researchers use the theory to make sense of phenomena
• Its concepts and principles explain what is going on and why
• Its concepts and principles are substantive enough to enable us to predict a future

Given these characteristics, a theory can best be understood as the foundation from which you investigate assumptions or predictions derived from previous studies about the research problem, but in a way that leads to new knowledge and understanding as well as, in some cases, discovering how to improve the relevance of the theory itself or to argue that the theory is outdated and a new theory needs to be formulated based on new evidence.

A theoretical framework consists of concepts and, together with their definitions and reference to relevant scholarly literature, existing theory that is used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your research paper and that relate to the broader areas of knowledge being considered.

The theoretical framework is most often not something readily found within the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research studies for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways :

• An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
• The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
• Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to intellectually transition from simply describing a phenomenon you have observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
• Having a theory helps you identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest and highlights the need to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.
• The theoretical framework adds context around the theory itself based on how scholars had previously tested the theory in relation their overall research design [i.e., purpose of the study, methods of collecting data or information, methods of analysis, the time frame in which information is collected, study setting, and the methodological strategy used to conduct the research].

By virtue of its applicative nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges associated with a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Corvellec, Hervé, ed. What is Theory?: Answers from the Social and Cultural Sciences . Stockholm: Copenhagen Business School Press, 2013; Asher, Herbert B. Theory-Building and Data Analysis in the Social Sciences . Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press, 1984; Drafting an Argument. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Kivunja, Charles. "Distinguishing between Theory, Theoretical Framework, and Conceptual Framework: A Systematic Review of Lessons from the Field." International Journal of Higher Education 7 (2018): 44-53; Omodan, Bunmi Isaiah. "A Model for Selecting Theoretical Framework through Epistemology of Research Paradigms." African Journal of Inter/Multidisciplinary Studies 4 (2022): 275-285; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Jarvis, Peter. The Practitioner-Researcher. Developing Theory from Practice . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1999.

Strategies for Developing the Theoretical Framework

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

• Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
• Brainstorm about what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, "What factors contribute to the presumed effect?"
• Review related literature to find how scholars have addressed your research problem. Identify the assumptions from which the author(s) addressed the problem.
• List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
• Review key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
• Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint [framework] that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered. It also facilitates the understanding of concepts and variables according to given definitions and builds new knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To that end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.

• Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
• Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
• Means for identifying and defining research problems,
• Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
• Ways of discerning certain facts among the accumulated knowledge that are important and which facts are not,
• Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
• Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
• Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining the boundaries of their profession, and
• Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Jacard, James and Jacob Jacoby. Theory Construction and Model-Building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists . New York: Guilford, 2010; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

Structure and Writing Style

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, your work is expected to test the validity of that existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism Theory, which categorizes perceived differences among nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism Theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the disputed split between southern and northern Sudan that led to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Based upon the above example, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as an answer to two basic questions:

• What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
• Why is your approach a feasible solution? [i.e., justify the application of your choice of a particular theory and explain why alternative constructs were rejected. I could choose instead to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among ethnic conflict theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

Just as a research problem in your paper requires contextualization and background information, a theory requires a framework for understanding its application to the topic being investigated. When writing and revising this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

• Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
• Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks, concepts, models, or theories . As noted in the example above, there will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the theory you've chosen is the appropriate one.
• The present tense is used when writing about theory. Although the past tense can be used to describe the history of a theory or the role of key theorists, the construction of your theoretical framework is happening now.
• You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
• Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory inadequately explains a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. "A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research." Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Reyes, Victoria. Demystifying the Journal Article. Inside Higher Education; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Weick, Karl E. “The Work of Theorizing.” In Theorizing in Social Science: The Context of Discovery . Richard Swedberg, editor. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2014), pp. 177-194.

Writing Tip

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Other Disciplines

An increasingly important trend in the social and behavioral sciences is to think about and attempt to understand research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories developed within your particular discipline, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbents in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be more engaged in the research topic.

CohenMiller, A. S. and P. Elizabeth Pate. "A Model for Developing Interdisciplinary Research Theoretical Frameworks." The Qualitative Researcher 24 (2019): 1211-1226; Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Undertheorize!

Do not leave the theory hanging out there in the introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you describe should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the review of pertinent literature and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose supports analysis of the research problem or, if appropriate, how the theoretical framework was found to be inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

Yet Another Writing Tip

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in newspapers and popular magazines and in non-academic settings. However, the difference between theory and hypothesis in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested assumptions that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory; critical race theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

• A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
• A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among a set of scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis. About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis. Slideshare presentation.

Still Yet Another Writing Tip

Be Prepared to Challenge the Validity of an Existing Theory

Theories are meant to be tested and their underlying assumptions challenged; they are not rigid or intransigent, but are meant to set forth general principles for explaining phenomena or predicting outcomes. Given this, testing theoretical assumptions is an important way that knowledge in any discipline develops and grows. If you're asked to apply an existing theory to a research problem, the analysis will likely include the expectation by your professor that you should offer modifications to the theory based on your research findings.

Indications that theoretical assumptions may need to be modified can include the following:

• Your findings suggest that the theory does not explain or account for current conditions or circumstances or the passage of time,
• The study reveals a finding that is incompatible with what the theory attempts to explain or predict, or
• Your analysis reveals that the theory overly generalizes behaviors or actions without taking into consideration specific factors revealed from your analysis [e.g., factors related to culture, nationality, history, gender, ethnicity, age, geographic location, legal norms or customs , religion, social class, socioeconomic status, etc.].

Philipsen, Kristian. "Theory Building: Using Abductive Search Strategies." In Collaborative Research Design: Working with Business for Meaningful Findings . Per Vagn Freytag and Louise Young, editors. (Singapore: Springer Nature, 2018), pp. 45-71; Shepherd, Dean A. and Roy Suddaby. "Theory Building: A Review and Integration." Journal of Management 43 (2017): 59-86.

• << Previous: The Research Problem/Question
• Next: 5. The Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Apr 1, 2024 9:56 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation

Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation

Published on October 14, 2015 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on July 18, 2023 by Tegan George.

Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review .

A strong theoretical framework gives your research direction. It allows you to convincingly interpret, explain, and generalize from your findings and show the relevance of your thesis or dissertation topic in your field.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Sample problem statement and research questions, sample theoretical framework, your theoretical framework, other interesting articles.

Your theoretical framework is based on:

• Your problem statement
• Your research questions
• Your literature review

A new boutique downtown is struggling with the fact that many of their online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases. This is a big issue for the otherwise fast-growing store.Management wants to increase customer loyalty. They believe that improved customer satisfaction will play a major role in achieving their goal of increased return customers.

To investigate this problem, you have zeroed in on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:

• Problem : Many online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases.
• Objective : To increase the quantity of return customers.
• Research question : How can the satisfaction of the boutique’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

The concepts of “customer loyalty” and “customer satisfaction” are clearly central to this study, along with their relationship to the likelihood that a customer will return. Your theoretical framework should define these concepts and discuss theories about the relationship between these variables.

Some sub-questions could include:

• What is the relationship between customer loyalty and customer satisfaction?
• How satisfied and loyal are the boutique’s online customers currently?
• What factors affect the satisfaction and loyalty of the boutique’s online customers?

As the concepts of “loyalty” and “customer satisfaction” play a major role in the investigation and will later be measured, they are essential concepts to define within your theoretical framework .

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Below is a simplified example showing how you can describe and compare theories in your thesis or dissertation . In this example, we focus on the concept of customer satisfaction introduced above.

Customer satisfaction

Thomassen (2003, p. 69) defines customer satisfaction as “the perception of the customer as a result of consciously or unconsciously comparing their experiences with their expectations.” Kotler & Keller (2008, p. 80) build on this definition, stating that customer satisfaction is determined by “the degree to which someone is happy or disappointed with the observed performance of a product in relation to his or her expectations.”

Performance that is below expectations leads to a dissatisfied customer, while performance that satisfies expectations produces satisfied customers (Kotler & Keller, 2003, p. 80).

The definition of Zeithaml and Bitner (2003, p. 86) is slightly different from that of Thomassen. They posit that “satisfaction is the consumer fulfillment response. It is a judgement that a product or service feature, or the product of service itself, provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment.” Zeithaml and Bitner’s emphasis is thus on obtaining a certain satisfaction in relation to purchasing.

Thomassen’s definition is the most relevant to the aims of this study, given the emphasis it places on unconscious perception. Although Zeithaml and Bitner, like Thomassen, say that customer satisfaction is a reaction to the experience gained, there is no distinction between conscious and unconscious comparisons in their definition.

The boutique claims in its mission statement that it wants to sell not only a product, but also a feeling. As a result, unconscious comparison will play an important role in the satisfaction of its customers. Thomassen’s definition is therefore more relevant.

Thomassen’s Customer Satisfaction Model

According to Thomassen, both the so-called “value proposition” and other influences have an impact on final customer satisfaction. In his satisfaction model (Fig. 1), Thomassen shows that word-of-mouth, personal needs, past experiences, and marketing and public relations determine customers’ needs and expectations.

These factors are compared to their experiences, with the interplay between expectations and experiences determining a customer’s satisfaction level. Thomassen’s model is important for this study as it allows us to determine both the extent to which the boutique’s customers are satisfied, as well as where improvements can be made.

Figure 1 Customer satisfaction creation 

Of course, you could analyze the concepts more thoroughly and compare additional definitions to each other. You could also discuss the theories and ideas of key authors in greater detail and provide several models to illustrate different concepts.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or research bias, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Research bias

• Anchoring bias
• Halo effect
• The Baader–Meinhof phenomenon
• The placebo effect
• Nonresponse bias
• Deep learning
• Generative AI
• Machine learning
• Reinforcement learning
• Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Vinz, S. (2023, July 18). Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation. Scribbr. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/theoretical-framework-example/

Is this article helpful?

Sarah's academic background includes a Master of Arts in English, a Master of International Affairs degree, and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. She loves the challenge of finding the perfect formulation or wording and derives much satisfaction from helping students take their academic writing up a notch.

Other students also liked

What is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Organizing Academic Research Papers: Theoretical Framework

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• How to Manage Group Projects
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Acknowledgements

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge, within the limits of the critical bounding assumptions. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and describes the theory which explains why the research problem under study exists.

Importance of Theory

A theoretical framework consists of concepts, together with their definitions, and existing theory/theories that are used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your  research paper and that will relate it to the broader fields of knowledge in the class you are taking.

The theoretical framework is not something that is found readily available in the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research literature for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways .

• An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
• The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
• Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to move from simply describing a phenomenon observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
• Having a theory helps you to identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest. It alerts you to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.

By virtue of its application nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges of a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Strategies for Developing the Theoretical Framework

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

• Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
• Brainstorm on what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, what factors contribute to the presumed effect?
• Review related literature to find answers to your research question.
• List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
• Review the key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory or theories that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
• Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint (framework) that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered, understanding concepts and variables according to the given definitions, and building knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To the end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.*

• Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
• Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
• Means for identifying and defining research problems,
• Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
• Way of telling us that certain facts among the accumulated knowledge are important and which facts are not,
• Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
• Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
• Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining boundaries of their profession, and
• Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

*Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

Structure and Writing Style

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, you are expected to test the validity of an existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism theory, which categorizes perceived differences between nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the growing split between southern and northern Sudan that may likely lead to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Given this, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as the answer to two basic questions:

• What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
• Why is your approach a feasible solution? [I could choose to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among Ethnic Conflict Theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

In writing this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

• Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
• Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks , concepts, models, or theories . There will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the framework you've chosen is the appropriate one.
• The present tense is used when writing about theory.
• You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
• Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitiations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory does not explain a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research. Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Writing Tip

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Elsewhere

A growing and increasingly important trend in the social sciences is to think about and attempt to understand specific research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories you've read about in a particular class, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbants in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be fully engaged in the research topic.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Undertheorize!

Never leave the theory hanging out there in the Introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you introduce should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the analysis and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose fit the research problem, or if appropriate, was inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

Still Another Writing Tip

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in everyday use. However, the difference between them in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested hypotheses that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

• A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
• A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis . About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis . Slideshare presentation.

• << Previous: The Research Problem/Question
• Next: 5. The Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
• QuickSearch
• Library Catalog
• Databases A-Z
• Publication Finder
• Course Reserves
• Citation Linker
• Digital Commons
• Our Website

Research Support

• Ask a Librarian
• Appointments
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Research Guides
• Databases by Subject
• Citation Help

Using the Library

• Reserve a Group Study Room
• Renew Books
• Honors Study Rooms
• Off-Campus Access
• Library Policies
• Library Technology

User Information

• Grad Students
• Online Students
• COVID-19 Updates
• Staff Directory
• News & Announcements
• Library Newsletter

My Accounts

• Interlibrary Loan
• Staff Site Login

FIND US ON  

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4 Theories in scientific research

As we know from previous chapters, science is knowledge represented as a collection of ‘theories’ derived using the scientific method. In this chapter, we will examine what a theory is, why we need theories in research, the building blocks of a theory, how to evaluate theories, how can we apply theories in research, and also present illustrative examples of five theories frequently used in social science research.

Theories are explanations of a natural or social behaviour, event, or phenomenon. More formally, a scientific theory is a system of constructs (concepts) and propositions (relationships between those constructs) that collectively presents a logical, systematic, and coherent explanation of a phenomenon of interest within some assumptions and boundary conditions (Bacharach 1989). [1]

Theories should explain why things happen, rather than just describe or predict. Note that it is possible to predict events or behaviours using a set of predictors, without necessarily explaining why such events are taking place. For instance, market analysts predict fluctuations in the stock market based on market announcements, earnings reports of major companies, and new data from the Federal Reserve and other agencies, based on previously observed correlations . Prediction requires only correlations. In contrast, explanations require causations , or understanding of cause-effect relationships. Establishing causation requires three conditions: one, correlations between two constructs, two, temporal precedence (the cause must precede the effect in time), and three, rejection of alternative hypotheses (through testing). Scientific theories are different from theological, philosophical, or other explanations in that scientific theories can be empirically tested using scientific methods.

Explanations can be idiographic or nomothetic. Idiographic explanations are those that explain a single situation or event in idiosyncratic detail. For example, you did poorly on an exam because: you forgot that you had an exam on that day, you arrived late to the exam due to a traffic jam, you panicked midway through the exam, you had to work late the previous evening and could not study for the exam, or even your dog ate your textbook. The explanations may be detailed, accurate, and valid, but they may not apply to other similar situations, even involving the same person, and are hence not generalisable. In contrast, nomothetic explanations seek to explain a class of situations or events rather than a specific situation or event. For example, students who do poorly in exams do so because they did not spend adequate time preparing for exams or because they suffer from nervousness, attention-deficit, or some other medical disorder. Because nomothetic explanations are designed to be generalisable across situations, events, or people, they tend to be less precise, less complete, and less detailed. However, they explain economically, using only a few explanatory variables. Because theories are also intended to serve as generalised explanations for patterns of events, behaviours, or phenomena, theoretical explanations are generally nomothetic in nature.

While understanding theories, it is also important to understand what theories are not. A theory is not data, facts, typologies, taxonomies, or empirical findings. A collection of facts is not a theory, just as a pile of stones is not a house. Likewise, a collection of constructs (e.g., a typology of constructs) is not a theory, because theories must go well beyond constructs to include propositions, explanations, and boundary conditions. Data, facts, and findings operate at the empirical or observational level, while theories operate at a conceptual level and are based on logic rather than observations.

There are many benefits to using theories in research. First, theories provide the underlying logic for the occurrence of natural or social phenomena by explaining the key drivers and outcomes of the target phenomenon, and the underlying processes responsible for driving that phenomenon. Second, they aid in sense-making by helping us synthesise prior empirical findings within a theoretical framework and reconcile contradictory findings by discovering contingent factors influencing the relationship between two constructs in different studies. Third, theories provide guidance for future research by helping identify constructs and relationships that are worthy of further research. Fourth, theories can contribute to cumulative knowledge building by bridging gaps between other theories and by causing existing theories to be re-evaluated in a new light.

However, theories can also have their own share of limitations. As simplified explanations of reality, theories may not always provide adequate explanations of the phenomenon of interest based on a limited set of constructs and relationships. Theories are designed to be simple and parsimonious explanations, while reality may be significantly more complex. Furthermore, theories may impose blinders or limit researchers’ ‘range of vision’, causing them to miss out on important concepts that are not defined by the theory.

Building blocks of a theory

David Whetten (1989) [2] suggests that there are four building blocks of a theory: constructs, propositions, logic, and boundary conditions/assumptions. Constructs capture the ‘what’ of theories (i.e., what concepts are important for explaining a phenomenon?), propositions capture the ‘how’ (i.e., how are these concepts related to each other?), logic represents the ‘why’ (i.e., why are these concepts related?), and boundary conditions/assumptions examines the ‘who, when, and where’ (i.e., under what circumstances will these concepts and relationships work?). Though constructs and propositions were previously discussed in Chapter 2, we describe them again here for the sake of completeness.

Constructs are abstract concepts specified at a high level of abstraction that are chosen specifically to explain the phenomenon of interest. Recall from Chapter 2 that constructs may be unidimensional (i.e., embody a single concept), such as weight or age, or multi-dimensional (i.e., embody multiple underlying concepts), such as personality or culture. While some constructs, such as age, education, and firm size, are easy to understand, others, such as creativity, prejudice, and organisational agility, may be more complex and abstruse, and still others such as trust, attitude, and learning may represent temporal tendencies rather than steady states. Nevertheless, all constructs must have clear and unambiguous operational definitions that should specify exactly how the construct will be measured and at what level of analysis (individual, group, organisational, etc.). Measurable representations of abstract constructs are called variables . For instance, IQ score is a variable that is purported to measure an abstract construct called ‘intelligence’. As noted earlier, scientific research proceeds along two planes: a theoretical plane and an empirical plane. Constructs are conceptualised at the theoretical plane, while variables are operationalised and measured at the empirical (observational) plane. Furthermore, variables may be independent, dependent, mediating, or moderating, as discussed in Chapter 2. The distinction between constructs (conceptualised at the theoretical level) and variables (measured at the empirical level) is shown in Figure 4.1.

Propositions are associations postulated between constructs based on deductive logic. Propositions are stated in declarative form and should ideally indicate a cause-effect relationship (e.g., if X occurs, then Y will follow). Note that propositions may be conjectural but must be testable, and should be rejected if they are not supported by empirical observations. However, like constructs, propositions are stated at the theoretical level, and they can only be tested by examining the corresponding relationship between measurable variables of those constructs. The empirical formulation of propositions, stated as relationships between variables, are called hypotheses . The distinction between propositions (formulated at the theoretical level) and hypotheses (tested at the empirical level) is depicted in Figure 4.1.

The third building block of a theory is the logic that provides the basis for justifying the propositions as postulated. Logic acts like a ‘glue’ that connects the theoretical constructs and provides meaning and relevance to the relationships between these constructs. Logic also represents the ‘explanation’ that lies at the core of a theory. Without logic, propositions will be ad hoc, arbitrary, and meaningless, and cannot be tied into the cohesive ‘system of propositions’ that is the heart of any theory.

Finally, all theories are constrained by assumptions about values, time, and space, and boundary conditions that govern where the theory can be applied and where it cannot be applied. For example, many economic theories assume that human beings are rational (or boundedly rational) and employ utility maximisation based on cost and benefit expectations as a way of understand human behaviour. In contrast, political science theories assume that people are more political than rational, and try to position themselves in their professional or personal environment in a way that maximises their power and control over others. Given the nature of their underlying assumptions, economic and political theories are not directly comparable, and researchers should not use economic theories if their objective is to understand the power structure or its evolution in an organisation. Likewise, theories may have implicit cultural assumptions (e.g., whether they apply to individualistic or collective cultures), temporal assumptions (e.g., whether they apply to early stages or later stages of human behaviour), and spatial assumptions (e.g., whether they apply to certain localities but not to others). If a theory is to be properly used or tested, all of the implicit assumptions that form the boundaries of that theory must be properly understood. Unfortunately, theorists rarely state their implicit assumptions clearly, which leads to frequent misapplications of theories to problem situations in research.

Attributes of a good theory

Theories are simplified and often partial explanations of complex social reality. As such, there can be good explanations or poor explanations, and consequently, there can be good theories or poor theories. How can we evaluate the ‘goodness’ of a given theory? Different criteria have been proposed by different researchers, the more important of which are listed below:

Logical consistency: Are the theoretical constructs, propositions, boundary conditions, and assumptions logically consistent with each other? If some of these ‘building blocks’ of a theory are inconsistent with each other (e.g., a theory assumes rationality, but some constructs represent non-rational concepts), then the theory is a poor theory.

Explanatory power: How much does a given theory explain (or predict) reality? Good theories obviously explain the target phenomenon better than rival theories, as often measured by variance explained (R-squared) value in regression equations.

Falsifiability: British philosopher Karl Popper stated in the 1940s that for theories to be valid, they must be falsifiable. Falsifiability ensures that the theory is potentially disprovable, if empirical data does not match with theoretical propositions, which allows for their empirical testing by researchers. In other words, theories cannot be theories unless they can be empirically testable. Tautological statements, such as ‘a day with high temperatures is a hot day’ are not empirically testable because a hot day is defined (and measured) as a day with high temperatures, and hence, such statements cannot be viewed as a theoretical proposition. Falsifiability requires the presence of rival explanations, it ensures that the constructs are adequately measurable, and so forth. However, note that saying that a theory is falsifiable is not the same as saying that a theory should be falsified. If a theory is indeed falsified based on empirical evidence, then it was probably a poor theory to begin with.

Parsimony: Parsimony examines how much of a phenomenon is explained with how few variables. The concept is attributed to fourteenth century English logician Father William of Ockham (and hence called ‘Ockham’s razor’ or ‘Occam’s razor’), which states that among competing explanations that sufficiently explain the observed evidence, the simplest theory (i.e., one that uses the smallest number of variables or makes the fewest assumptions) is the best. Explanation of a complex social phenomenon can always be increased by adding more and more constructs. However, such an approach defeats the purpose of having a theory, which is intended to be a ‘simplified’ and generalisable explanation of reality. Parsimony relates to the degrees of freedom in a given theory. Parsimonious theories have higher degrees of freedom, which allow them to be more easily generalised to other contexts, settings, and populations.

Approaches to theorising

How do researchers build theories? Steinfeld and Fulk (1990) [3] recommend four such approaches. The first approach is to build theories inductively based on observed patterns of events or behaviours. Such an approach is often called ‘grounded theory building’, because the theory is grounded in empirical observations. This technique is heavily dependent on the observational and interpretive abilities of the researcher, and the resulting theory may be subjective and non-confirmable. Furthermore, observing certain patterns of events will not necessarily make a theory, unless the researcher is able to provide consistent explanations for the observed patterns. We will discuss the grounded theory approach in a later chapter on qualitative research.

The second approach to theory building is to conduct a bottom-up conceptual analysis to identify different sets of predictors relevant to the phenomenon of interest using a predefined framework. One such framework may be a simple input-process-output framework, where the researcher may look for different categories of inputs, such as individual, organisational, and/or technological factors potentially related to the phenomenon of interest (the output), and describe the underlying processes that link these factors to the target phenomenon. This is also an inductive approach that relies heavily on the inductive abilities of the researcher, and interpretation may be biased by researcher’s prior knowledge of the phenomenon being studied.

The third approach to theorising is to extend or modify existing theories to explain a new context, such as by extending theories of individual learning to explain organisational learning. While making such an extension, certain concepts, propositions, and/or boundary conditions of the old theory may be retained and others modified to fit the new context. This deductive approach leverages the rich inventory of social science theories developed by prior theoreticians, and is an efficient way of building new theories by expanding on existing ones.

The fourth approach is to apply existing theories in entirely new contexts by drawing upon the structural similarities between the two contexts. This approach relies on reasoning by analogy, and is probably the most creative way of theorising using a deductive approach. For instance, Markus (1987) [4] used analogic similarities between a nuclear explosion and uncontrolled growth of networks or network-based businesses to propose a critical mass theory of network growth. Just as a nuclear explosion requires a critical mass of radioactive material to sustain a nuclear explosion, Markus suggested that a network requires a critical mass of users to sustain its growth, and without such critical mass, users may leave the network, causing an eventual demise of the network.

Examples of social science theories

In this section, we present brief overviews of a few illustrative theories from different social science disciplines. These theories explain different types of social behaviors, using a set of constructs, propositions, boundary conditions, assumptions, and underlying logic. Note that the following represents just a simplistic introduction to these theories. Readers are advised to consult the original sources of these theories for more details and insights on each theory.

Agency theory. Agency theory (also called principal-agent theory), a classic theory in the organisational economics literature, was originally proposed by Ross (1973) [5] to explain two-party relationships—such as those between an employer and its employees, between organisational executives and shareholders, and between buyers and sellers—whose goals are not congruent with each other. The goal of agency theory is to specify optimal contracts and the conditions under which such contracts may help minimise the effect of goal incongruence. The core assumptions of this theory are that human beings are self-interested individuals, boundedly rational, and risk-averse, and the theory can be applied at the individual or organisational level.

The two parties in this theory are the principal and the agent—the principal employs the agent to perform certain tasks on its behalf. While the principal’s goal is quick and effective completion of the assigned task, the agent’s goal may be working at its own pace, avoiding risks, and seeking self-interest—such as personal pay—over corporate interests, hence, the goal incongruence. Compounding the nature of the problem may be information asymmetry problems caused by the principal’s inability to adequately observe the agent’s behaviour or accurately evaluate the agent’s skill sets. Such asymmetry may lead to agency problems where the agent may not put forth the effort needed to get the task done (the moral hazard problem) or may misrepresent its expertise or skills to get the job but not perform as expected (the adverse selection problem). Typical contracts that are behaviour-based, such as a monthly salary, cannot overcome these problems. Hence, agency theory recommends using outcome-based contracts, such as commissions or a fee payable upon task completion, or mixed contracts that combine behaviour-based and outcome-based incentives. An employee stock option plan is an example of an outcome-based contract, while employee pay is a behaviour-based contract. Agency theory also recommends tools that principals may employ to improve the efficacy of behaviour-based contracts, such as investing in monitoring mechanisms—e.g. hiring supervisors—to counter the information asymmetry caused by moral hazard, designing renewable contracts contingent on the agent’s performance (performance assessment makes the contract partially outcome-based), or by improving the structure of the assigned task to make it more programmable and therefore more observable.

Theory of planned behaviour. Postulated by Azjen (1991), [6] the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is a generalised theory of human behaviour in social psychology literature that can be used to study a wide range of individual behaviours. It presumes that individual behaviour represents conscious reasoned choice, and is shaped by cognitive thinking and social pressures. The theory postulates that behaviours are based on one’s intention regarding that behaviour, which in turn is a function of the person’s attitude toward the behaviour, subjective norm regarding that behaviour, and perception of control over that behaviour (see Figure 4.2). Attitude is defined as the individual’s overall positive or negative feelings about performing the behaviour in question, which may be assessed as a summation of one’s beliefs regarding the different consequences of that behaviour, weighted by the desirability of those consequences. Subjective norm refers to one’s perception of whether people important to that person expect the person to perform the intended behaviour, and is represented as a weighted combination of the expected norms of different referent groups such as friends, colleagues, or supervisors at work. Behavioural control is one’s perception of internal or external controls constraining the behaviour in question. Internal controls may include the person’s ability to perform the intended behaviour (self-efficacy), while external control refers to the availability of external resources needed to perform that behaviour (facilitating conditions). TPB also suggests that sometimes people may intend to perform a given behaviour but lack the resources needed to do so, and therefore posits that behavioural control can have a direct effect on behaviour, in addition to the indirect effect mediated by intention.

TPB is an extension of an earlier theory called the theory of reasoned action, which included attitude and subjective norm as key drivers of intention, but not behavioural control. The latter construct was added by Ajzen in TPB to account for circumstances when people may have incomplete control over their own behaviours (such as not having high-speed Internet access for web surfing).

Innovation diffusion theory. Innovation diffusion theory (IDT) is a seminal theory in the communications literature that explains how innovations are adopted within a population of potential adopters. The concept was first studied by French sociologist Gabriel Tarde, but the theory was developed by Everett Rogers in 1962 based on observations of 508 diffusion studies. The four key elements in this theory are: innovation, communication channels, time, and social system. Innovations may include new technologies, new practices, or new ideas, and adopters may be individuals or organisations. At the macro (population) level, IDT views innovation diffusion as a process of communication where people in a social system learn about a new innovation and its potential benefits through communication channels—such as mass media or prior adopters— and are persuaded to adopt it. Diffusion is a temporal process—the diffusion process starts off slow among a few early adopters, then picks up speed as the innovation is adopted by the mainstream population, and finally slows down as the adopter population reaches saturation. The cumulative adoption pattern is therefore an s-shaped curve, as shown in Figure 4.3, and the adopter distribution represents a normal distribution. All adopters are not identical, and adopters can be classified into innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards based on the time of their adoption. The rate of diffusion also depends on characteristics of the social system such as the presence of opinion leaders (experts whose opinions are valued by others) and change agents (people who influence others’ behaviours).

At the micro (adopter) level, Rogers (1995) [7] suggests that innovation adoption is a process consisting of five stages: one, knowledge : when adopters first learn about an innovation from mass-media or interpersonal channels, two, persuasion : when they are persuaded by prior adopters to try the innovation, three, decision : their decision to accept or reject the innovation, four,: their initial utilisation of the innovation, and five, confirmation : their decision to continue using it to its fullest potential (see Figure 4.4). Five innovation characteristics are presumed to shape adopters’ innovation adoption decisions: one, relative advantage : the expected benefits of an innovation relative to prior innovations, two, compatibility : the extent to which the innovation fits with the adopter’s work habits, beliefs, and values, three, complexity : the extent to which the innovation is difficult to learn and use, four, trialability : the extent to which the innovation can be tested on a trial basis, and five, observability : the extent to which the results of using the innovation can be clearly observed. The last two characteristics have since been dropped from many innovation studies. Complexity is negatively correlated to innovation adoption, while the other four factors are positively correlated. Innovation adoption also depends on personal factors such as the adopter’s risk-taking propensity, education level, cosmopolitanism, and communication influence. Early adopters are venturesome, well educated, and rely more on mass media for information about the innovation, while later adopters rely more on interpersonal sources—such as friends and family—as their primary source of information. IDT has been criticised for having a ‘pro-innovation bias’—that is for presuming that all innovations are beneficial and will be eventually diffused across the entire population, and because it does not allow for inefficient innovations such as fads or fashions to die off quickly without being adopted by the entire population or being replaced by better innovations.

Elaboration likelihood model . Developed by Petty and Cacioppo (1986), [8] the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) is a dual-process theory of attitude formation or change in psychology literature. It explains how individuals can be influenced to change their attitude toward a certain object, event, or behaviour and the relative efficacy of such change strategies. The ELM posits that one’s attitude may be shaped by two ‘routes’ of influence: the central route and the peripheral route, which differ in the amount of thoughtful information processing or ‘elaboration required of people (see Figure 4.5). The central route requires a person to think about issue-related arguments in an informational message and carefully scrutinise the merits and relevance of those arguments, before forming an informed judgment about the target object. In the peripheral route, subjects rely on external ‘cues’ such as number of prior users, endorsements from experts, or likeability of the endorser, rather than on the quality of arguments, in framing their attitude towards the target object. The latter route is less cognitively demanding, and the routes of attitude change are typically operationalised in the ELM using the argument quality and peripheral cues constructs respectively.

Whether people will be influenced by the central or peripheral routes depends upon their ability and motivation to elaborate the central merits of an argument. This ability and motivation to elaborate is called elaboration likelihood . People in a state of high elaboration likelihood (high ability and high motivation) are more likely to thoughtfully process the information presented and are therefore more influenced by argument quality, while those in the low elaboration likelihood state are more motivated by peripheral cues. Elaboration likelihood is a situational characteristic and not a personal trait. For instance, a doctor may employ the central route for diagnosing and treating a medical ailment (by virtue of his or her expertise of the subject), but may rely on peripheral cues from auto mechanics to understand the problems with his car. As such, the theory has widespread implications about how to enact attitude change toward new products or ideas and even social change.

General deterrence theory. Two utilitarian philosophers of the eighteenth century, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, formulated general deterrence theory (GDT) as both an explanation of crime and a method for reducing it. GDT examines why certain individuals engage in deviant, anti-social, or criminal behaviours. This theory holds that people are fundamentally rational (for both conforming and deviant behaviours), and that they freely choose deviant behaviours based on a rational cost-benefit calculation. Because people naturally choose utility-maximising behaviours, deviant choices that engender personal gain or pleasure can be controlled by increasing the costs of such behaviours in the form of punishments (countermeasures) as well as increasing the probability of apprehension. Swiftness, severity, and certainty of punishments are the key constructs in GDT.

While classical positivist research in criminology seeks generalised causes of criminal behaviours, such as poverty, lack of education, psychological conditions, and recommends strategies to rehabilitate criminals, such as by providing them job training and medical treatment, GDT focuses on the criminal decision-making process and situational factors that influence that process. Hence, a criminal’s personal situation—such as his personal values, his affluence, and his need for money—and the environmental context—such as how protected the target is, how efficient the local police are, how likely criminals are to be apprehended—play key roles in this decision-making process. The focus of GDT is not how to rehabilitate criminals and avert future criminal behaviours, but how to make criminal activities less attractive and therefore prevent crimes. To that end, ‘target hardening’ such as installing deadbolts and building self-defence skills, legal deterrents such as eliminating parole for certain crimes, ‘three strikes law’ (mandatory incarceration for three offences, even if the offences are minor and not worth imprisonment), and the death penalty, increasing the chances of apprehension using means such as neighbourhood watch programs, special task forces on drugs or gang-related crimes, and increased police patrols, and educational programs such as highly visible notices such as ‘Trespassers will be prosecuted’ are effective in preventing crimes. This theory has interesting implications not only for traditional crimes, but also for contemporary white-collar crimes such as insider trading, software piracy, and illegal sharing of music.

• Bacharach, S.B. (1989). Organizational theories: some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review , 14(4), 496-515. ↵
• Whetten, D. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review , 14(4), 490-495. ↵
• Steinfield, C.W. and Fulk, J. (1990). The theory imperative. In J. Fulk & C.W. (Eds.), Organizations and communications technology (pp. 13–26). Newsburt Park, CA: Sage Publications. ↵
• Markus, M.L. (1987). Toward a ‘critical mass’ theory of interactive media: universal access, interdependence and diffusion. Communication Research , 14(5), 491-511. ↵
• Ross, S.A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. American Economic , 63(2), 134-139 ↵
• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , (50), 179–211. ↵
• Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press. ↵
• Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). C ommunication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change . New York: Springer-Verlag. ↵

Social Science Research: Principles, Methods and Practices (Revised edition) Copyright © 2019 by Anol Bhattacherjee is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Theoretical Framework

• Purpose of Guide
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• The Research Problem/Question
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Is it Peer-Reviewed?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism [linked guide]
• Annotated Bibliography
• Grading Someone Else's Paper

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge within the limits of critical bounding assumptions. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and describes the theory that explains why the research problem under study exists.

Abend, Gabriel. "The Meaning of Theory." Sociological Theory 26 (June 2008): 173–199; Swanson, Richard A. Theory Building in Applied Disciplines . San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers 2013.

Importance of Theory

A theoretical framework consists of concepts and, together with their definitions and reference to relevant scholarly literature, existing theory that is used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your research paper and that relate to the broader areas of knowledge being considered.

The theoretical framework is most often not something readily found within the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research studies for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways :

• An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
• The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
• Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to intellectually transition from simply describing a phenomenon you have observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
• Having a theory helps you identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest and highlights the need to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.

By virtue of its applicative nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges associated with a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework . College of Education. Alabama State University; Corvellec, Hervé, ed. What is Theory?: Answers from the Social and Cultural Sciences . Stockholm: Copenhagen Business School Press, 2013; Asher, Herbert B. Theory-Building and Data Analysis in the Social Sciences . Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press, 1984; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research . Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Jarvis, Peter. The Practitioner-Researcher. Developing Theory from Practice . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1999.

Strategies for Developing the Theoretical Framework

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

• Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
• Brainstorm about what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, "What factors contribute to the presumed effect?"
• Review related literature to find how scholars have addressed your research problem. Identify the assumptions from which the author(s) addressed the problem.
• List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
• Review key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
• Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint [framework] that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered. It also facilitates the understanding of concepts and variables according to given definitions and builds new knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To that end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.

• Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
• Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
• Means for identifying and defining research problems,
• Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
• Ways of discerning certain facts among the accumulated knowledge that are important and which facts are not,
• Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
• Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
• Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining the boundaries of their profession, and
• Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Jacard, James and Jacob Jacoby. Theory Construction and Model-Building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists . New York: Guilford, 2010; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

Structure and Writing Style

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, your work is expected to test the validity of that existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism Theory, which categorizes perceived differences among nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism Theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the disputed split between southern and northern Sudan that led to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Based upon the above example, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as an answer to two basic questions:

• What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
• Why is your approach a feasible solution? [i.e., justify the application of your choice of a particular theory and explain why alternative constructs were rejected. I could choose instead to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among ethnic conflict theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

Just as a research problem in your paper requires contextualization and background information, a theory requires a framework for understanding its application to the topic being investigated. When writing and revising this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

• Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
• Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks , concepts, models, or theories . As noted in the example above, there will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the theory you've chosen is the appropriate one.
• The present tense is used when writing about theory. Although the past tense can be used to describe the history of a theory or the role of key theorists, the construction of your theoretical framework is happening now.
• You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
• Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory inadequately explains a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework . College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. "A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research." Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Reyes, Victoria. Demystifying the Journal Article . Inside Higher Education; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research . Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Weick, Karl E. “The Work of Theorizing.” In Theorizing in Social Science: The Context of Discovery . Richard Swedberg, editor. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2014), pp. 177-194.

Writing Tip

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Elsewhere

A growing and increasingly important trend in the social and behavioral sciences is to think about and attempt to understand specific research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories developed within your particular discipline, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbents in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be fully engaged in the research topic.

CohenMiller, A. S. and P. Elizabeth Pate. "A Model for Developing Interdisciplinary Research Theoretical Frameworks." The Qualitative Researcher 24 (2019): 1211-1226; Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Undertheorize!

Do not leave the theory hanging out there in the introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you describe should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the review of pertinent literature and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose supports analysis of the research problem, or if appropriate, how the theoretical framework was found in some way to be inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

Yet Another Writing Tip

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in newspapers and popular magazines and in non-academic settings. However, the difference between theory and hypothesis in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested assumptions that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory; critical race theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

• A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
• A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis . About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis . Slideshare presentation.

Still Another Writing Tip

Be Prepared to Challenge the Validity of an Existing Theory

Theories are meant to be tested and their underlying assumptions challenged; they are not rigid or intransigent, but are meant to set forth general principles for explaining phenomena or predicting outcomes. Given this, testing theoretical assumptions is an important way that knowledge in any discipline develops and grows. If you're asked to apply an existing theory to a research problem, the analysis may include an expectation by your professor that you should offer modifications to the theory based on your research findings. Indications that theoretical assumptions may need to be modified can include the following:

• Your findings suggest that the theory does not explain or account for current conditions or circumstances,
• The study reveals a finding that is significantly incongruent with what the theory attempts to explain or predict, or
• Your analysis reveals that the theory overly generalizes behaviors or actions without taking into consideration specific factors [e.g., factors related to culture, nationality, history, gender, ethnicity, age, geographic location, legal norms or customs , religion, social class, socioeconomic status, etc.].

Philipsen, Kristian. "Theory Building: Using Abductive Search Strategies." In Collaborative Research Design: Working with Business for Meaningful Findings . Per Vagn Freytag and Louise Young, editors. (Singapore: Springer Nature, 2018), pp. 45-71; Shepherd, Dean A. and Roy Suddaby. "Theory Building: A Review and Integration." Journal of Management 43 (2017): 59-86.

• << Previous: Background Information
• Next: The Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 8, 2023 12:19 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.txstate.edu/socialscienceresearch

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Find the Theory in Your Research Little Quick Fix

• Janet E. Salmons - Free-range Scholar, Vision2Lead and Research Community Manager at SAGE MethodSpace
• Description

One of the most crucial foundational steps in any research project surrounds understanding and choosing an appropriate theory to frame the research question. Theoretical frameworks don’t just impact design, they impact how the entire study is interpreted, contextualized, and discussed. There are lots of resources about epistemologies and ontologies, but most focus on the philosophical and historical dimensions that can quickly overwhelm students. They need something quick that helps them understand the practical connection between theory and the purpose/nature of the study and, more importantly, decide which theory is best suited to their particular study. This Little Quick Fix covers questions like: What is theory? How does theory relate to research design? What is a theoretical framework? What is a theoretical contribution? How do I choose which theory (or theories) fits my research? What practical steps should I take to integrate theory into my research?

Little Quick Fix  titles provide quick but authoritative answers to the problems, hurdles, and assessment points students face in the research course, project proposal, or design—whatever their methods learning is.

• Lively, ultra-modern design;  full-colour, each page a tailored design.
• An hour's read. Easy to dip in and out of with clear navigation enables the reader to find what she needs—quick.
• Direct written style  gets to the point with clear language. Nothing needs to be read twice. No fluff.
• Learning is reinforced through  a 2-minute overview summary; 3-second summaries with super-quick Q&A
• DIY tasks  create a work plan to accomplish a task, do a self-check quiz, solve a problem, get students to what they need to show their supervisor.
• Checkpoints   in each section make sure students are nailing it as they go and support self-directed learning.
• How do I know I’m done?  Each  Little Quick Fix  wraps up with a final checklist that allows the reader to self-assess they’ve got what they need to progress, submit, or ace the test or task.

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

A brief but focused look at a key aspect of any research.

This book is one of this series which are excellent introductions that all students no matter what their prior experience and knowledge will be able to engage, explore and learn from to support their research as education students, highly recommended.

This is a fantastic little book for students

Nice little guide that focuses on specific issues and are explained in an appealing way for undergraduate students struggling with academic writing and research methods.

It is easy to understand for students studying the foundation of research

All titles in this set are excellent and introduced to all students during their intial induction study day

An excellent and digestible small book that will help students to understand the importance and meaning of situating 'theory' in their research.

I was really excited about a quick, little book that my students could use as a quick start in the subject. However, to be honest, I think it is totally useless and provides no additional value. if you switch a little bit back and forth on wikipedia, you get more insights and help. That is not what I expected...

Preview this book

Sample materials & chapters.

Intro & Qu 1: What do researchers mean when they talk about epistemology, ontolo

For instructors

Select a purchasing option.

Shipped Options:

Little Quick Fixes for Research Projects Set 2021

Little Quick Fixes: The Box Set 2021

Related Products

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Theoretical Research: Definition, Methods + Examples

Research is the careful study of a particular research problem or concern using the scientific method. A theory is essential for any research project because it gives it direction and helps prove or disprove something. Theoretical basis helps us figure out how things work and why we do certain things.

Theoretical research lets you examine and discuss a research object using philosophical ideas and abstract theoretical structures.

In theoretical research, you can’t look at the research object directly. With the help of research literature, your research aims to define and sketch out the chosen topic’s conceptual models, explanations, and structures.

LEARN ABOUT: Research Process Steps

This blog will cover theoretical research and why it is essential. In addition to that, we are going to go over some examples.

What is the theoretical research?

Theoretical research is the systematic examination of a set of beliefs and assumptions.

It aims to learn more about a subject and help us understand it better. The information gathered in this way is not used for anything in particular because this kind of research aims to learn more.

All professionals, like biologists, chemists, engineers, architects, philosophers, writers, sociologists, historians, etc., can do theoretical research. No matter what field you work in, theoretical research is the foundation for new ideas.

It tries to answer basic questions about people, which is why this kind of research is used in every field of knowledge.

For example , a researcher starts with the idea that we need to understand the world around us. To do this, he begins with a hypothesis and tests it through experiments that will help him develop new ideas. 

What is the theoretical framework?

A theoretical framework is a critical component in research that provides a structured foundation for investigating a specific topic or problem. It encompasses a set of interconnected theories, existing theories, and concepts that guide the entire research process. 

The theoretical framework introduces a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter. Also, the theoretical framework strengthens the research’s validity and specifies the key elements that will be explored. Furthermore, it connects different ideas and theories, forming a cohesive structure that underpins the research endeavor.

A complete theoretical framework consists of a network of theories, existing theories, and concepts that collectively shape the direction of a research study. 

The theoretical framework is the fundamental principle that will be explored, strengthens the research’s credibility by aligning it with established knowledge, specifies the variables under investigation, and connects different aspects of the research to create a unified approach.

Theoretical frameworks are the intellectual scaffolding upon which the research is constructed. It is the lens through which researchers view their subject, guiding their choice of methodologies, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. By incorporating existing theory, and established concepts, a theoretical framework not only grounds the research but also provides a coherent roadmap for exploring the intricacies of the chosen topic.

Benefits of theoretical research

Theoretical research yields a wealth of benefits across various fields, from social sciences to human resource development and political science. Here’s a breakdown of these benefits while incorporating the requested topics:

Predictive power

Theoretical models are the cornerstone of theoretical research. They grant us predictive power, enabling us to forecast intricate behaviors within complex systems, like societal interactions. In political science, for instance, a theoretical model helps anticipate potential outcomes of policy changes.

Understanding human behavior

Drawing from key social science theories, it assists us in deciphering human behavior and societal dynamics. For instance, in the context of human resource development, theories related to motivation and psychology provide insights into how to effectively manage a diverse workforce.

Optimizing workforce

In the realm of human resource development, insights gleaned from theoretical research, along with the research methods knowledge base, help create targeted training programs. By understanding various learning methodologies and psychological factors, organizations can optimize workforce training for better results.

Building on foundations

It doesn’t exist in isolation; it builds upon existing theories. For instance, within the human resource development handbook, theoretical research expands established concepts, refining their applicability to contemporary organizational challenges.

Ethical policy formulation

Within political science, theoretical research isn’t confined to governance structures. It extends to ethical considerations, aiding policymakers in creating policies that balance the collective good with individual rights, ensuring just and fair governance. 

Rigorous investigations

Theoretical research underscores the importance of research methods knowledge base. This knowledge equips researchers in theory-building research methods and other fields to design robust research methodologies, yielding accurate data and credible insights.

Long-term impact

Theoretical research leaves a lasting impact. The theoretical models and insights from key social science theories provide enduring frameworks for subsequent research, contributing to the cumulative growth of knowledge in these fields.

Innovation and practical applications

It doesn’t merely remain theoretical. It inspires innovation and practical applications. By merging insights from diverse theories and fields, practitioners in human resource development devise innovative strategies to foster employee growth and well-being.

Theoretical research method

Researchers follow so many methods when doing research. There are two types of theoretical research methods.

• Scientific methods
• Social science method 

Let’s explore them below:

Scientific method

Scientific methods have some important points that you should know. Let’s figure them out below:

• Observation: Any part you want to explain can be found through observation. It helps define the area of research.
• Hypothesis: The hypothesis is the idea put into words, which helps us figure out what we see.
• Experimentation: Hypotheses are tested through experiments to see if they are true. These experiments are different for each research.
• Theory: When we create a theory, we do it because we believe it will explain hypotheses of higher probability.
• Conclusions: Conclusions are the learnings we derive from our investigation.

Social science methods

There are different methods for social science theoretical research. It consists of polls, documentation, and statistical analysis.

• Polls: It is a process whereby the researcher uses a topic-specific questionnaire to gather data. No changes are made to the environment or the phenomenon where the polls are conducted to get the most accurate results. QuestionPro live polls are a great way to get live audiences involved and engaged.
• Documentation: Documentation is a helpful and valuable technique that helps the researcher learn more about the subject. It means visiting libraries or other specialized places, like documentation centers, to look at the existing bibliography. With the documentation, you can find out what came before the investigated topic and what other investigations have found. This step is important because it shows whether or not similar investigations have been done before and what the results were.
• Statistic analysis : Statistics is a branch of math that looks at random events and differences. It follows the rules that are established by probability. It’s used a lot in sociology and language research. 

Examples of theoretical research

We talked about theoretical study methods in the previous part. We’ll give you some examples to help you understand it better.

Example 1: Theoretical research into the health benefits of hemp

The plant’s active principles are extracted and evaluated, and by studying their components, it is possible to determine what they contain and whether they can potentially serve as a medication.

Example 2: Linguistics research

Investigate to determine how many people in the Basque Country speak Basque. Surveys can be used to determine the number of native Basque speakers and those who speak Basque as a second language.

Example 3: Philosophical research

Research politics and ethics as they are presented in the writings of Hanna Arendt from a theoretical perspective.

LEARN ABOUT: 12 Best Tools for Researchers

From our above discussion, we learned about theoretical research and its methods and gave some examples. It explains things and leads to more knowledge for the sake of knowledge. This kind of research tries to find out more about a thing or an idea, but the results may take time to be helpful in the real world. 

This research is sometimes called basic research. Theoretical research is an important process that gives researchers valuable data with insight.

QuestionPro is a strong platform for managing your data. You can conduct simple surveys to more complex research using QuestionPro survey software.

At QuestionPro, we give researchers tools for collecting data, such as our survey software and a library of insights for any long-term study. Contact our expert team to find out more about it.

FREE TRIAL         LEARN MORE

MORE LIKE THIS

Customer Experience Automation: Benefits and Best Tools

Apr 1, 2024

7 Best Market Segmentation Tools in 2024

In-App Feedback Tools: How to Collect, Uses & 14 Best Tools

Mar 29, 2024

11 Best Customer Journey Analytics Software in 2024

Other categories.

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A guide to writing a theoretical research paper

This is a guide to help (my) students to write better papers (as well as better research plans and outlines). If you are a teacher, feel free to use it in any way you like (including "stealing" from it). Feedback would be highly appreciated. If you are a student and you found this guide helpful, feel free to share it with others. This guide is formatted to be printed as an A5 booklet.

Related Papers

Sher Singh Bhakar

Organisation of Book: The book is organized into two parts. Part one starts with thinking critically about research, explains what is (and isn’t) research, explains how to properly use research in your writing to make your points, introduces a series of writing exercises designed to help students to think about and write effective research papers. Instead of explaining how to write a single “research paper,” The Process of Research Writing part of the book breaks down the research process into many smaller and easier-to manage parts like what is a research paper, starting steps for writing research papers, writing conceptual understanding and review of literature, referencing including various styles of referencing, writing research methodology and results including interpretations, writing implications and limitations of research and what goes into conclusions. Part two contains sample research articles to demonstrate the application of techniques and methods of writing good resear...

Marivic Sumagaysay

Stevejobs.education

Dr. David Annan

Very often, little attention is paid to how students have to prepare and understand the processes of conducting research and mostly young scholars struggle in the early stages in the university career about what is required of them and how to present their proposal to their supervisors. Keeping this in mind, the purpose of this guidebook is to offer a critical and practical mind map introduction to research writing to assist researchers in creating an appropriate design for their research studies and to offer the simplest guide of creating a logical orientated research. The book is made using simple graphs to explain what is expected of researchers at each stage of their research writing to enable them to understand if any a missing link when conducting their research. The book is mostly content mind-map and figures to make it easier for the researcher to understand what is expected of them from the stages of their research to completion. It presents the basic tenets of methodological steps so that the researcher can become familiar with how to conduct research and what techniques to use in their choice for research writing.

Dr Dare E Ajayi

The complexities and diversities of human nature and challenges necessitated the need to discover and identify ways to solving and meeting human and academic problem needs. The existence of problems gave rise to the the need for research. The book takes researchers and students through the latest and best research practice through the adoption of simple, adoptable and practicable research models for academic and contemporary research writing.

Journal of Universal College of Medical Sciences

bishal joshi

INTRODUCTION A research paper is a part of academic writing where there is a gathering of information from different sources. It is multistep process. Selection of title is the most important part of research writing. The title which is interesting should be chosen for the research purpose. All the related information is gathered and the title for research is synthesized. After thorough understanding and developing the title, the preliminary outline is made which maintains the logical path for its exploration. After preliminary research, proper research work is started with collection of previous resources which is then organized and important points are noted. Then research paper is written by referring to outlines, notes, articles, journals and books. The research paper should be well structured containing core parts like introduction, material and methods, results and disscussion and important additional parts like title, abstract, references.

Abstract Students sometimes find the general process of writing an empirical research paper to be daunting. Yet, when the process is approached in a systematic way, students can become more comfortable with the writing and standard formatting used in an empirical article. Accordingly, the current paper serves as a template for the budding social scientist.

Kevin O'Donnell

Roohullah Nawandish

Richard Baskas, Ed.D. Candidate

Scientific Research Journal of Clinical and Medical Sciences

Ahmed Alkhaqani

Background: Confusion about elements of a research paper is common among students. The key to writing a good research paper is to know these common elements and their definitions. Maybe find that writing a research paper is not as easy as it seems. There are many parts and steps to the process, and it can be hard to figure out what needs to do and when. Objective: This article aims to teach these common aspects of a research paper to avoid common mistakes while drafting own. Conclusion: Each section of the research paper serves a distinct purpose and highlights a different aspect of the research. However, before starting drafting the manuscript, having a clear understanding of each section's purposes will help avoid mistakes.

RELATED PAPERS

FEBS Letters

Annie Leszkowicz

JOSE FELIX SANZ SANZ

Robert Klimek

Pedro Elosegui

arsil nyong

Journal of Medical Ultrasonics

Anda Pristavu

Genetics in Medicine

Christophe Simian

Nikita Pavlov

Dress Simple Elegan by Rumah Jahit Azka

rumahjahitazka kebumen

Journal of Plant Sciences

Prof. G.K.S. Aflakpui

Accounting and Business Research

Sayjda Talib

Journal of Nigerian Institute of Town Planners

Grace Adeniji-Oloukoi

Tania Pagotto

Stratejik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi

Ozge Ulug Yurttas

tirsanika surbakti

Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction

Global Policy

Gobinda Pal

CNS &amp; Neurological Disorders - Drug Targets

Iranian Journal of Management Studies

Mohammad Sharifirad

Zeitschrift f�r Physik C Particles and Fields

Victor Castillo

The Journal of Pathology

Sehbanul Islam

International journal of radiology and imaging technology

Bahar Dirican

Political Studies

Anthony Zito

Jean Daudelin

Journal of Sociolinguistics

Chloé Diskin-Holdaway

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

The use of theory in research

Affiliations.

• 1 School of Pharmacy and Life Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Riverside East, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, UK. [email protected].
• 2 Faculty of Health and Social Care, Robert Gordon University, Riverside East, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, UK.
• PMID: 26511946
• DOI: 10.1007/s11096-015-0216-y

All researchers should consider the theoretical basis for their studies very early on in the planning stage. The aim of this paper is to describe and discuss how theory (a 'comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a body of evidence') can inform and improve the quality and relevance of pharmacy-based research. Theories can be applied at many stages of quantitative and qualitative (and mixed) research processes, including: providing rationale for the study; defining the aim and research questions; considering the methodological stance; developing data collection and generation tools; providing a framework for data analysis, and interpretation. The focus of the paper is on the use of theoretical lenses, their selection and application. Two key theoretical lenses and their potential applications are described: the Theoretical Domains Framework in studies of behavioural change, and Normalization Process Theory in implementing, embedding and integrating interventions.

Keywords: Normalization Process Theory; Qualitative; Quantitative; Theoretical Domains Framework; Theoretical lens; Theory.

• Data Collection
• Models, Theoretical
• Pharmacy Research / methods*
• Statistics as Topic

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Theory – Definition, Types and Examples

Theory – Definition, Types and Examples

Table of Contents

Definition:

Theory is a set of ideas or principles used to explain or describe a particular phenomenon or set of phenomena. The term “theory” is commonly used in the scientific context to refer to a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is based on empirical evidence and rigorous testing.

Types of Theories

Types of Theories are as follows:

Scientific Theories

These are theories that explain natural phenomena and are based on empirical evidence. Examples include the theory of evolution, the germ theory of disease, and the theory of relativity.

Social Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain social phenomena, such as human behavior, culture, and society. Examples include social learning theory, structural functionalism, and feminist theory.

Psychological Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain human behavior and mental processes. Examples include behaviorism, cognitive psychology, and psychoanalysis.

Economic Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain economic phenomena, such as the behavior of markets, businesses, and consumers. Examples include supply and demand theory, Keynesian economics, and game theory.

Political Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain political phenomena, such as the behavior of governments, political systems, and international relations. Examples include liberalism, conservatism, and Marxism.

Philosophical Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain fundamental concepts, such as the nature of reality, knowledge, and morality. Examples include existentialism, utilitarianism, and metaphysics.

Mathematical Theories

These are theories that use mathematical concepts and models to explain phenomena in various fields, such as physics, economics, and computer science. Examples include set theory, probability theory, and game theory.

Communication Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain the processes and effects of communication, such as the transmission of information, the influence of media, and the development of language. Examples include social penetration theory, media effects theory, and speech act theory.

Biological Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain biological phenomena, such as the functioning of the human body, genetics, and evolution. Examples include the theory of natural selection, the germ theory of disease, and the central dogma of molecular biology.

Environmental Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain the interactions between humans and the natural environment, including the effects of human activities on the environment and the impact of environmental changes on human society. Examples include ecological systems theory, environmental determinism, and sustainability theory.

Educational Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain the processes and effects of learning and education. Examples include behaviorism, constructivism, and social learning theory.

Cultural Theories

These are theories that attempt to explain cultural phenomena, such as the formation and transmission of cultural values, norms, and beliefs. Examples include cultural studies, postcolonial theory, and critical race theory.

Examples of Theories

There are many theories in various fields of study. Here are some examples of theories in different areas:

• Evolutionary Theory: The theory of evolution by natural selection, proposed by Charles Darwin, explains how species change over time in response to their environment.
• Quantum Theory : Quantum theory is the branch of physics that describes the behavior of matter and energy on a very small scale.
• Social Learning Theory: Social learning theory suggests that people learn by observing and imitating the behaviors of others.
• Chaos Theory: Chaos theory is a branch of mathematics that studies complex systems and how they can exhibit unpredictable behavior.
• Cognitive Dissonance Theory : This theory explains how people often experience discomfort or tension when their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors are inconsistent with each other.
• Attachment Theory: Attachment theory explains how early relationships between infants and their caregivers can shape their emotional and social development later in life.
• General Relativity: General relativity is a theory of gravitation that explains how the force of gravity arises from the curvature of spacetime caused by massive objects.
• Game Theory: Game theory is a mathematical approach used to model and analyze the strategic interactions between individuals or groups.
• Self-Determination Theory: This theory suggests that people are motivated by three fundamental needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
• Systems Theory: Systems theory is a framework for understanding complex systems that emphasizes their interdependence, feedback loops, and dynamic behavior.

Applications of Theories

Applications of Theories are as follows:

• Science : Scientific theories are used to develop new technologies, create new medicines, and explore the natural world. For example, the theory of evolution by natural selection is used to understand the diversity of life on Earth, while the theory of relativity is used to develop new technologies such as GPS.
• Psychology : Theories of psychology are used to understand human behavior and to develop effective therapies. For example, the theory of cognitive dissonance helps us to understand why people resist changing their beliefs, while the theory of operant conditioning is used to help people change their behavior.
• Sociology : Sociological theories are used to understand social structures, institutions, and relationships. For example, the theory of social capital helps us to understand the importance of social networks in promoting economic and social development, while the theory of cultural capital explains how cultural knowledge and practices contribute to social inequality.
• Economics : Economic theories are used to understand markets, trade, and economic growth. For example, the theory of comparative advantage helps to explain why countries specialize in certain goods and services, while the theory of supply and demand helps us to understand the behavior of consumers and producers.
• Education : Theories of learning and teaching are used to develop effective educational practices. For example, the theory of constructivism emphasizes the importance of students constructing their own knowledge, while the theory of multiple intelligences suggests that students have different types of intelligence that should be recognized and nurtured.

Purpose of Theory

The purpose of a theory is to provide a framework or explanation for observed phenomena in a particular field of study. Theories are developed through a process of observation, experimentation, and analysis, and they are used to explain how and why things happen the way they do.

In science, theories are used to describe and predict natural phenomena, while in social sciences, theories are used to explain human behavior and social interactions. Theories can be tested through further observation and experimentation, and they can be modified or discarded if new evidence contradicts them.

Characteristics of Theory

• Explanation : Theories provide an explanation of a phenomenon or event. They identify the causes and underlying mechanisms that contribute to the observed outcomes.
• Predictive power: Theories have the ability to predict future outcomes or behaviors based on the identified causes and mechanisms.
• Testable: Theories are testable through empirical research. They can be subjected to observation, experimentation, and analysis to determine their validity and accuracy.
• Falsifiability : Theories can be falsified if they are found to be inconsistent with empirical evidence. This means that they can be proven to be false if the evidence does not support them.
• Generalizability : Theories are generalizable to other contexts and situations beyond the original research setting. They are not specific to a particular time or place.
• Organizing framework : Theories provide an organizing framework for understanding and interpreting information. They help researchers organize their observations and make sense of complex phenomena.
• Parsimony: Theories are typically simple and concise. They strive to explain phenomena using the fewest number of assumptions or variables possible.

Advantages of Theory

• Framework for research: Theories provide a framework for research by guiding the development of hypotheses and research questions.
• Organizing information: Theories help researchers organize their observations and make sense of complex phenomena. They provide a structure for understanding and interpreting information.
• Prediction: Theories can predict future outcomes or behaviors based on the identified causes and mechanisms.
• Understanding causality: Theories help researchers understand the causal relationships between variables and events.
• Integration of knowledge: Theories integrate existing knowledge and provide a foundation for new discoveries.
• Application : Theories can be applied to real-world problems to develop interventions and policies that address social issues.
• Communication: Theories provide a common language and understanding for researchers, which facilitates communication and collaboration.

Disadvantages of Theory

• Limited scope: Theories are limited by the scope of their research and the context in which they were developed. They may not be applicable to other contexts or situations beyond the original research setting.
• Simplification : Theories often simplify complex phenomena and may oversimplify or exclude important aspects of the phenomenon being studied.
• Bias : Theories can be influenced by researcher bias, which can affect the development and interpretation of the theory.
• Difficulty in testing: Some theories may be difficult to test empirically, making it challenging to determine their validity and accuracy.
• Incomplete understanding : Theories may provide an incomplete understanding of a phenomenon, as they are based on limited research and knowledge.
• Resistance to change : Theories can be resistant to change, making it challenging to update or revise them in light of new evidence.
• Inconsistency: Different theories within the same field may conflict with each other or present different explanations for the same phenomenon, leading to inconsistencies and confusion.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

What is Art – Definition, Types, Examples

What is Anthropology – Definition and Overview

What is Literature – Definition, Types, Examples

Economist – Definition, Types, Work Area

Anthropologist – Definition, Types, Work Area

What is History – Definitions, Periods, Methods

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Color and psychological functioning: a review of theoretical and empirical work

In the past decade there has been increased interest in research on color and psychological functioning. Important advances have been made in theoretical work and empirical work, but there are also important weaknesses in both areas that must be addressed for the literature to continue to develop apace. In this article, I provide brief theoretical and empirical reviews of research in this area, in each instance beginning with a historical background and recent advancements, and proceeding to an evaluation focused on weaknesses that provide guidelines for future research. I conclude by reiterating that the literature on color and psychological functioning is at a nascent stage of development, and by recommending patience and prudence regarding conclusions about theory, findings, and real-world application.

The past decade has seen enhanced interest in research in the area of color and psychological functioning. Progress has been made on both theoretical and empirical fronts, but there are also weaknesses on both of these fronts that must be attended to for this research area to continue to make progress. In the following, I briefly review both advances and weaknesses in the literature on color and psychological functioning.

Theoretical Work

Background and recent developments.

Color has fascinated scholars for millennia ( Sloane, 1991 ; Gage, 1993 ). Theorizing on color and psychological functioning has been present since Goethe (1810) penned his Theory of Colors , in which he linked color categories (e.g., the “plus” colors of yellow, red–yellow, yellow–red) to emotional responding (e.g., warmth, excitement). Goldstein (1942) expanded on Goethe’s intuitions, positing that certain colors (e.g., red, yellow) produce systematic physiological reactions manifest in emotional experience (e.g., negative arousal), cognitive orientation (e.g., outward focus), and overt action (e.g., forceful behavior). Subsequent theorizing derived from Goldstein’s ideas has focused on wavelength, positing that longer wavelength colors feel arousing or warm, whereas shorter wavelength colors feel relaxing or cool ( Nakashian, 1964 ; Crowley, 1993 ). Other conceptual statements about color and psychological functioning have focused on general associations that people have to colors and their corresponding influence on downstream affect, cognition, and behavior (e.g., black is associated with aggression and elicits aggressive behavior; Frank and Gilovich, 1988 ; Soldat et al., 1997 ). Finally, much writing on color and psychological functioning has been completely atheoretical, focused exclusively on finding answers to applied questions (e.g., “What wall color facilitates worker alertness and productivity?”). The aforementioned theories and conceptual statements continue to motivate research on color and psychological functioning. However, several other promising theoretical frameworks have also emerged in the past decade, and I review these frameworks in the following.

Hill and Barton (2005) noted that in many non-human animals, including primate species, dominance in aggressive encounters (i.e., superior physical condition) is signaled by the bright red of oxygenated blood visible on highly vascularized bare skin. Artificial red (e.g., on leg bands) has likewise been shown to signal dominance in non-human animals, mimicking the natural physiological process ( Cuthill et al., 1997 ). In humans in aggressive encounters, a testosterone surge produces visible reddening on the face and fear leads to pallor ( Drummond and Quay, 2001 ; Levenson, 2003 ). Hill and Barton (2005) posited that the parallel between humans and non-humans present at the physiological level may extend to artificial stimuli, such that wearing red in sport contests may convey dominance and lead to a competitive advantage.

Other theorists have also utilized a comparative approach in positing links between skin coloration and the evaluation of conspecifics. Changizi et al. (2006) and Changizi (2009) contend that trichromatic vision evolved to enable primates, including humans, to detect subtle changes in blood flow beneath the skin that carry important information about the emotional state of the conspecific. Increased red can convey anger, embarrassment, or sexual arousal, whereas increased bluish or greenish tint can convey illness or poor physiological condition. Thus, visual sensitivity to these color modulations facilitates various forms of social interaction. In similar fashion, Stephen et al. (2009) and Stephen and McKeegan (2010) propose that perceivers use information about skin coloration (perhaps particularly from the face, Tan and Stephen, 2012 ) to make inferences about the attractiveness, health, and dominance of conspecifics. Redness (from blood oxygenization) and yellowness (from carotenoids) are both seen as facilitating positive judgments. Fink et al. (2006) and Fink and Matts (2007) posit that the homogeneity of skin coloration is an important factor in evaluating the age, attractiveness, and health of faces.

Elliot and Maier (2012) have proposed color-in-context theory, which draws on social learning, as well as biology. Some responses to color stimuli are presumed to be solely due to the repeated pairing of color and particular concepts, messages, and experiences. Others, however, are presumed to represent a biologically engrained predisposition that is reinforced and shaped by social learning. Through this social learning, color associations can be extended beyond natural bodily processes (e.g., blood flow modulations) to objects in close proximity to the body (e.g., clothes, accessories). Thus, for example, red may not only increase attractiveness evaluations when viewed on the face, but also when viewed on a shirt or dress. As implied by the name of the theory, the physical and psychological context in which color is perceived is thought to influence its meaning and, accordingly, responses to it. Thus, blue on a ribbon is positive (indicating first place), but blue on a piece of meat is negative (indicating rotten), and a red shirt may enhance the attractiveness of a potential mate (red = sex/romance), but not of a person evaluating one’s competence (red = failure/danger).

Meier and Robinson (2005) and Meier (in press ) have posited a conceptual metaphor theory of color. From this perspective, people talk and think about abstract concepts in concrete terms grounded in perceptual experience (i.e., they use metaphors) to help them understand and navigate their social world ( Lakoff and Johnson, 1999 ). Thus, anger entails reddening of the face, so anger is metaphorically described as “seeing red,” and positive emotions and experiences are often depicted in terms of lightness (rather than darkness), so lightness is metaphorically linked to good (“seeing the light”) rather than bad (“in the dark”). These metaphoric associations are presumed to have implications for important outcomes such as morality judgments (e.g., white things are viewed as pure) and stereotyping (e.g., dark faces are viewed more negatively).

For many years it has been known that light directly influences physiology and increases arousal (see Cajochen, 2007 , for a review), but recently theorists have posited that such effects are wavelength dependent. Blue light, in particular, is posited to activate the melanopsin photoreceptor system which, in turn, activates the brain structures involved in sub-cortical arousal and higher-order attentional processing ( Cajochen et al., 2005 ; Lockley et al., 2006 ). As such, exposure to blue light is expected to facilitate alertness and enhance performance on tasks requiring sustained attention.

Evaluation and Recommendations

Drawing on recent theorizing in evolutionary psychology, emotion science, retinal physiology, person perception, and social cognition, the aforementioned conceptualizations represent important advances to the literature on color and psychological functioning. Nevertheless, theory in this area remains at a nascent level of development, and the following weaknesses may be identified.

First, the focus of theoretical work in this area is either extremely specific or extremely general. A precise conceptual proposition such as red signals dominance and leads to competitive advantage in sports ( Hill and Barton, 2005 ) is valuable in that it can be directly translated into a clear, testable hypothesis; however, it is not clear how this specific hypothesis connects to a broader understanding of color–performance relations in achievement settings more generally. On the other end of the spectrum, a general conceptualization such as color-in-context theory ( Elliot and Maier, 2012 ) is valuable in that it offers several widely applicable premises; however, these premises are only vaguely suggestive of precise hypotheses in specific contexts. What is needed are mid-level theoretical frameworks that comprehensively, yet precisely explain and predict links between color and psychological functioning in specific contexts (for emerging developments, see Pazda and Greitemeyer, in press ; Spence, in press ; Stephen and Perrett, in press ).

Second, the extant theoretical work is limited in scope in terms of range of hues, range of color properties, and direction of influence. Most theorizing has focused on one hue, red, which is understandable given its prominence in nature, on the body, and in society ( Changizi, 2009 ; Elliot and Maier, 2014 ); however, other hues also carry important associations that undoubtedly have downstream effects (e.g., blue: Labrecque and Milne, 2012 ; green: Akers et al., 2012 ). Color has three basic properties: hue, lightness, and chroma ( Fairchild, 2013 ). Variation in any or all of these properties could influence downstream affect, cognition, or behavior, yet only hue is considered in most theorizing (most likely because experientially, it is the most salient color property). Lightness and chroma also undoubtedly have implications for psychological functioning (e.g., lightness: Kareklas et al., 2014 ; chroma: Lee et al., 2013 ); lightness has received some attention within conceptual metaphor theory ( Meier, in press ; see also Prado-León and Rosales-Cinco, 2011 ), but chroma has been almost entirely overlooked, as has the issue of combinations of hue, lightness, and chroma. Finally, most theorizing has focused on color as an independent variable rather than a dependent variable; however, it is also likely that many situational and intrapersonal factors influence color perception (e.g., situational: Bubl et al., 2009 ; intrapersonal: Fetterman et al., 2015 ).

Third, theorizing to date has focused primarily on main effects, with only a modicum of attention allocated to the important issue of moderation. As research literatures develop and mature, they progress from a sole focus on “is” questions (“Does X influence Y?”) to additionally considering “when” questions (“Under what conditions does X influence Y and under what conditions does X not influence Y?”). These “second generation” questions ( Zanna and Fazio, 1982 , p. 283) can seem less exciting and even deflating in that they posit boundary conditions that constrain the generalizability of an effect. Nevertheless, this step is invaluable in that it adds conceptual precision and clarity, and begins to address the issue of real-world applicability. All color effects undoubtedly depend on certain conditions – culture, gender, age, type of task, variant of color, etc. – and acquiring an understanding of these conditions will represent an important marker of maturity for this literature (for movement in this direction, see Schwarz and Singer, 2013 ; Tracy and Beall, 2014 ; Bertrams et al., 2015 ; Buechner et al., in press ; Young, in press ). Another, more succinct, way to state this third weakness is that theorizing in this area needs to take context, in all its forms, more seriously.

Empirical Work

Empirical work on color and psychological functioning dates back to the late 19th century ( Féré, 1887 ; see Pressey, 1921 , for a review). A consistent feature of this work, from its inception to the past decade, is that it has been fraught with major methodological problems that have precluded rigorous testing and clear interpretation ( O’Connor, 2011 ). One problem has been a failure to attend to rudimentary scientific procedures such as experimenter blindness to condition, identifying, and excluding color deficient participants, and standardizing the duration of color presentation or exposure. Another problem has been a failure to specify and control for color at the spectral level in manipulations. Without such specification, it is impossible to know what precise combination of color properties was investigated, and without such control, the confounding of focal and non-focal color properties is inevitable ( Whitfield and Wiltshire, 1990 ; Valdez and Mehrabian, 1994 ). Yet another problem has been the use of underpowered samples. This problem, shared across scientific disciplines ( Maxwell, 2004 ), can lead to Type I errors, Type II errors, and inflated effect sizes ( Fraley and Vazire, 2014 ; Murayama et al., 2014 ). Together, these methodological problems have greatly hampered progress in this area.

Although some of the aforementioned problems remain (see “Evaluation and Recommendations” below), others have been rectified in recent work. This, coupled with advances in theory development, has led to a surge in empirical activity. In the following, I review the diverse areas in which color work has been conducted in the past decade, and the findings that have emerged. Space considerations require me to constrain this review to a brief mention of central findings within each area. I focus on findings with humans (for reviews of research with non-human animals, see Higham and Winters, in press ; Setchell, in press ) that have been obtained in multiple (at least five) independent labs. Table ​ Table1 1 provides a summary, as well as representative examples and specific references.

Research on color and psychological functioning.

In research on color and selective attention, red stimuli have been shown to receive an attentional advantage (see Folk, in press , for a review). Research on color and alertness has shown that blue light increases subjective alertness and performance on attention-based tasks (see Chellappa et al., 2011 , for a review). Studies on color and athletic performance have linked wearing red to better performance and perceived performance in sport competitions and tasks (see Maier et al., in press , for a review). In research on color and intellectual performance, viewing red prior to a challenging cognitive task has been shown to undermine performance (see Shi et al., 2015 , for a review). Research focused on color and aggressiveness/dominance evaluation has shown that viewing red on self or other increases appraisals of aggressiveness and dominance (see Krenn, 2014 , for a review). Empirical work on color and avoidance motivation has linked viewing red in achievement contexts to increased caution and avoidance (see Elliot and Maier, 2014 , for a review). In research on color and attraction, viewing red on or near a female has been shown to enhance attraction in heterosexual males (see Pazda and Greitemeyer, in press , for a review). Research on color and store/company evaluation has shown that blue on stores/logos increases quality and trustworthiness appraisals (see Labrecque and Milne, 2012 , for a review). Finally, empirical work on color and eating/drinking has shown that red influences food and beverage perception and consumption (see Spence, in press , for a review).

The aforementioned findings represent important contributions to the literature on color and psychological functioning, and highlight the multidisciplinary nature of research in this area. Nevertheless, much like the extant theoretical work, the extant empirical work remains at a nascent level of development, due, in part, to the following weaknesses.

First, although in some research in this area color properties are controlled for at the spectral level, in most research it (still) is not. Color control is typically done improperly at the device (rather than the spectral) level, is impossible to implement (e.g., in web-based platform studies), or is ignored altogether. Color control is admittedly difficult, as it requires technical equipment for color assessment and presentation, as well as the expertise to use it. Nevertheless, careful color control is essential if systematic scientific work is to be conducted in this area. Findings from uncontrolled research can be informative in initial explorations of color hypotheses, but such work is inherently fraught with interpretational ambiguity ( Whitfield and Wiltshire, 1990 ; Elliot and Maier, 2014 ) that must be subsequently addressed.

Second, color perception is not only a function of lightness, chroma, and hue, but also of factors such as viewing distance and angle, amount and type of ambient light, and presence of other colors in the immediate background and general environmental surround ( Hunt and Pointer, 2011 ; Brainard and Radonjić, 2014 ; Fairchild, 2015 ). In basic color science research (e.g., on color physics, color physiology, color appearance modeling, etcetera; see Gegenfurtner and Ennis, in press ; Johnson, in press ; Stockman and Brainard, in press ), these factors are carefully specified and controlled for in order to establish standardized participant viewing conditions. These factors have been largely ignored and allowed to vary in research on color and psychological functioning, with unknown consequences. An important next step for research in this area is to move to incorporate these more rigorous standardization procedures widely utilized by basic color scientists. With regard to both this and the aforementioned weakness, it should be acknowledged that exact and complete control is not actually possible in color research, given the multitude of factors that influence color perception ( Committee on Colorimetry of the Optical Society of America, 1953 ) and our current level of knowledge about and ability to control them ( Fairchild, 2015 ). As such, the standard that must be embraced and used as a guideline in this work is to control color properties and viewing conditions to the extent possible given current technology, and to keep up with advances in the field that will increasingly afford more precise and efficient color management.

Third, although in some research in this area, large, fully powered samples are used, much of the research remains underpowered. This is a problem in general, but it is particularly a problem when the initial demonstration of an effect is underpowered (e.g., Elliot and Niesta, 2008 ), because initial work is often used as a guide for determining sample size in subsequent work (both heuristically and via power analysis). Underpowered samples commonly produce overestimated effect size estimates ( Ioannidis, 2008 ), and basing subsequent sample sizes on such estimates simply perpetuates the problem. Small sample sizes can also lead researchers to prematurely conclude that a hypothesis is disconfirmed, overlooking a potentially important advance ( Murayama et al., 2014 ). Findings from small sampled studies should be considered preliminary; running large sampled studies with carefully controlled color stimuli is essential if a robust scientific literature is to be developed. Furthermore, as the “evidentiary value movement” ( Finkel et al., 2015 ) makes inroads in the empirical sciences, color scientists would do well to be at the leading edge of implementing such rigorous practices as publically archiving research materials and data, designating exploratory from confirmatory analyses, supplementing or even replacing significant testing with “new statistics” ( Cumming, 2014 ), and even preregistering research protocols and analyses (see Finkel et al., 2015 , for an overview).

In both reviewing advances in and identifying weaknesses of the literature on color and psychological functioning, it is important to bear in mind that the existing theoretical and empirical work is at an early stage of development. It is premature to offer any bold theoretical statements, definitive empirical pronouncements, or impassioned calls for application; rather, it is best to be patient and to humbly acknowledge that color psychology is a uniquely complex area of inquiry ( Kuehni, 2012 ; Fairchild, 2013 ) that is only beginning to come into its own. Findings from color research can be provocative and media friendly, and the public (and the field as well) can be tempted to reach conclusions before the science is fully in place. There is considerable promise in research on color and psychological functioning, but considerably more theoretical and empirical work needs to be done before the full extent of this promise can be discerned and, hopefully, fulfilled.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

• Aiken K. D., Pascal V. J. (2013). Seeing red, feeling red: how a change in field color influences perceptions. Int. J. Sport Soc. 3 107–120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Akers A., Barton J., Cossey R., Gainsford P., Griffin M., Micklewright D. (2012). Visual color perception in green exercise: positive effects of mood on perceived exertion. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46 8661–8666 10.1021/es301685g [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alberts W., van der Geest T. M. (2011). Color matters: color as trustworthiness cue in websites. Tech. Comm. 58 149–160. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barli Ö., Bilgili B., Dane Ş. (2006). Association of consumers’ sex and eyedness and lighting and wall color of a store with price attraction and perceived quality of goods and inside visual appeal. Percept. Motor Skill 103 447–450 10.2466/PMS.103.6.447-450 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker S. I., Valuch C., Ansorge U. (2014). Color priming in pop-out search depends on the relative color of the target. Front. Psychol. 5 : 289 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00289 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bertrams A., Baumeister R. F., Englert C., Furley P. (2015). Ego depletion in color priming research: self-control strength moderates the detrimental effect of red on cognitive test performance. Pers. Soc. Psychol. B. 41 311–322 10.1177/0146167214564968 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brainard D. H., Radonjić A. (2014). “Color constancy” in The New Visual Neurosciences , eds Werner J., Chalupa L. (Cambridge, MA; MIT Press; ), 545–556. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bruno N., Martani M., Corsini C., Oleari C. (2013). The effect of the color red on consuming food does not depend on achromatic (Michelson) contrast and extends to rubbing cream on the skin. Appetite 71 307–313 10.1016/j.appet.2013.08.012 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bubl E., Kern E., Ebert D., Bach M., Tebartz van Elst L. (2009). Seeing gray when feeling blue? Depression can be measures in the eye of the diseased. Biol. Psychiat. 68 205–208 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.02.009 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buechner V. L., Maier M. A., Lichtenfeld S., Elliot A. J. Emotion expression and color: their joint influence on perceptions of male attractiveness and social position. Curr. Psychol . (in press) [ Google Scholar ]
• Buechner V. L., Maier M. A., Lichtenfeld S., Schwarz S. (2014). Red – take a closer look. PLoS ONE 9 : e108111 10.1371/journal.pone.0108111 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cajochen C. (2007). Alerting effects of light. Sleep Med. Rev . 11 453–464 10.1016/j.smrv.2007.07.009 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cajochen C., Frey S., Anders D., Späti J., Bues M., Pross A., et al. (2011). Evening exposure to a light-emitting diodes (LED)-backlit computer screen affects circadian physiology and cognitive performance. J. Appl. Phsysoil. 110 1432–1438 10.1152/japplphysiol.00165.2011 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cajochen C., Münch M., Kobialka S., Kräuchi K., Steiner R., Oelhafen P., et al. (2005). High sensitivity of human melatonin, alertness, thermoregulation, and heart rate to short wavelength light. J. Clin. Endocr. Metab. 90 1311–1316 10.1210/jc.2004-0957 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Caldwell D. F., Burger J. M. (2011). On thin ice: does uniform color really affect aggression in professional hockey? Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 2 306–310 10.1177/1948550610389824 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Changizi M. (2009). The Vision Revolution . Dallas, TX: Benbella. [ Google Scholar ]
• Changizi M. A., Zhang Q., Shimojo S. (2006). Bare skin, blood and the evolution of primate colour vision. Biol. Lett. 2 217–221 10.1098/rsbl.2006.0440 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chebat J. C., Morrin M. (2007). Colors and cultures: exploring the effects of mall décor on consumer perceptions. J. Bus. Res. 60 189–196 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.11.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chellappa S. L., Steiner R., Blattner P., Oelhafen P., Götz T., Cajochen C. (2011). Non-visual effects of light on melatonin, alertness, and cognitive performance: can blue-enriched light keep us alert? PLoS ONE 26 : e16429 10.1371/journal.pone.0016429 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Committee on Colorimetry of the Optical Society of America (1953). The Science of Color . Washington, DC: Optical Society of America. [ Google Scholar ]
• Crowley A. E. (1993). The two dimensional impact of color on shopping. Market. Lett. 4 59–69 10.1007/BF00994188 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cumming G. (2014). The new statistics: why and how. Psychol. Sci. 25 7–29 10.1177/0956797613504966 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cuthill I. C., Hunt S., Cleary C., Clark C. (1997). Color bands, dominance, and body mass regulation in male zebra finches ( Taeniopygia guttata ). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. Sci. 264 1093–1099 10.1098/rspb.1997.0151 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drummond P. D., Quay S. H. (2001). The effect of expressing anger on cardiovascular reactivity and facial blood flow in Chinese and Caucasians. Psychophysiology 38 190–196 10.1111/1469-8986.3820190 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., Maier M. A. (2012). Color-in-context theory. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45 61–125 10.1016/B978-0-12-394286-9.00002-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., Maier M. A. (2014). Color psychology: effects of perceiving color on psychological functioning in humans. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 65 95–120 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115035 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., Maier M. A., Moller A. C., Friedman R., Meinhardt J. (2007). Color and psychological functioning: the effect of red on performance attainment. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 136 154–168 10.1037/0096-3445.136.1.154 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot A. J., Niesta D. (2008). Romantic red: red enhances men’s attraction to women. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 95 1150–1164 10.1037/0022-3514.95.5.1150 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elwood J. A., Bode J. (2014). Student preferences vis-à-vis teacher feedback in university EFL writing classes in Japan. System 42 333–343 10.1016/j.system.2013.12.023 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fairchild M. D. (2013). Color Appearance Models, 3rd Edn New York, NY: Wiley Press; 10.1002/9781118653128 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fairchild M. D. (2015). Seeing, adapting to, and reproducing the appearance of nature. Appl. Optics 54 B107–B116 10.1364/AO.54.00B107 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Feltman R., Elliot A. J. (2011). The influence of red on perceptions of dominance and threat in a competitive context. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 33 308–314. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fetterman A. K., Liu T., Robinson M. D. (2015). Extending color psychology to the personality realm: interpersonal hostility varied by red preferences and perceptual biases. J. Personal. 83 106–116 10.1111/jopy.12087 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Féré C. (1887). Note sur les conditions physiologiques des émotions. Revue Phil. 24 561–581. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fink B., Grammer K., Matts P. J. (2006). Visible skin color distribution plays a role in the perception of age, attractiveness, and health in female faces. Evol. Hum. Behav. 27 433–442 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.08.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fink B., Matts P. J. (2007). The effects of skin colour distribution and topography cues on the perception of female age and health. J. Eur. Acad. Derm. 22 493–498 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2007.02512.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Finkel E. J., Eastwick P. W., Reis H. T. (2015). Best research practices in psychology: Illustrating epistemological and pragmatic considerations with the case of relationship science. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 108 275–297 10.1037/pspi0000007 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folk C. L. (in press) “The role of color in the voluntary and involuntary guidance of selective attention,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Fraley R. C., Vazire S. (2014). The N-pact factor: evaluating the quality of empirical journals with respect to sample size and statistical power. PLoS ONE 9 : e109019 10.1371/journal.pone.0109019 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frank M. G., Gilovich T. (1988). The dark side of self and social perception: black uniforms and aggression in professional sports. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54 74–85 10.1037/0022-3514.54.1.74 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Furley P., Dicks M., Memmert D. (2012). Nonverbal behavior in soccer: the influence of dominant and submissive body language on the impression formation and expectancy of success of soccer players. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 34 61–82. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gage J. (1993). Color and Culture: Practice and Meaning from Antiquity to Abstraction . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia-Rubio M. A., Picazo-Tadeo A. J., González-Gómez F. (2011). Does a red shirt improve sporting performance? Evidence from Spanish football. Appl. Econ. Lett. 18 1001–1004 10.1080/13504851.2010.520666 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gegenfurtner K. R., Ennis R. (in press) “Fundamentals of color vision II: higher order color processing,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Genschow O., Reutner L., Wänke M. (2012). The color red reduces snack food and soft Drink intake. Appetite 58 699–702 10.1016/j.appet.2011.12.023 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gnambs T., Appel M., Batinic B. (2010). Color red in web-based knowledge testing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26 1625–1631 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.010 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goethe W. (1810). Theory of Colors . London: Frank Cass. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldstein K. (1942). Some experimental observations concerning the influence of colors on the function of the organism. Occup. Ther. Rehab. 21 147–151 10.1097/00002060-194206000-00002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greenlees I. A., Eynon M., Thelwell R. C. (2013). Color of soccer goalkeepers’ uniforms influences the outcomed of penalty kicks. Percept. Mot. Skill. 116 1–10 10.2466/30.24.PMS.117x14z6 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greenlees I., Leyland A., Thelwell R., Filby W. (2008). Soccer penalty takers’ uniform color and pre-penalty kick gaze affect the impressions formed of them by opposing goalkeepers. J. Sport Sci. 26 569–576 10.1080/02640410701744446 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guéguen N. (2012). Color and women attractiveness: when red clothed women are perceived to have more intense sexual intent. J. Soc. Psychol. 152 261–265 10.1080/00224545.2011.605398 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guéguen N., Jacob C. (2014). Coffee cup color and evaluation of a beverage’s “warmth quality.” Color Res. Appl. 39 79–81 10.1002/col.21757 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hagemann N., Strauss B., Leißing J. (2008). When the referee sees red. Psychol. Sci . 19 769–771 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02155.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higham J. P., Winters S. (in press) “Color and mate choice in non-human animals,” in Handbook of Color Psychology, eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Hill R. A., Barton R. A. (2005). Red enhances human performance in contests. Nature 435 293 10.1038/435293a [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunt R. W. G., Pointer M. R. (2011). Measuring Colour , 4th Edn New York, NY: Wiley Press; 10.1002/9781119975595 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ilie A., Ioan S., Zagrean L., Moldovan M. (2008). Better to be red than blue in virtual competition. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 11 375–377 10.1089/cpb.2007.0122 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ioannidis J. P. A. (2008). Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology 19 640–648 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31818131e7 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson G. M. (in press) “Color appearance phenomena and visual illusions,” in Handbook of Color Psychology, eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Kareklas I., Brunel F. F., Coulter R. A. (2014). Judgment is not color blind: the impact of automatic color preference on product advertising preferences. J. Consum. Psychol. 24 87–95 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.09.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krenn B. (2014). The impact of uniform color on judging tackles in association football. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 15 222–225 10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.11.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuehni R. (2012). Color: An Introduction to Practice and Principles , 3rd Edn New York, NY: Wiley; 10.1002/9781118533567 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Labrecque L. L., Milne G. R. (2012). Exciting red and competent blue: the importance of color in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 40 711–727 10.1007/s11747-010-0245-y [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lakoff G., Johnson M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenges to Western Thought . New York, NY: Basic Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee S., Lee K., Lee S., Song J. (2013). Origins of human color preference for food. J. Food Eng. 119 508–515 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.06.021 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee S., Rao V. S. (2010). Color and store choice in electronic commerce: the explanatory role of trust. J. Electr. Commer. Res. 11 110–126. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lehrl S., Gerstmeyer K., Jacob J. H., Frieling H., Henkel A. W., Meyrer R., et al. (2007). Blue light improves cognitive performance. J. Neural Trans. 114 457–460 10.1007/s00702-006-0621-4 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levenson R. W. (2003). Blood, sweat, and fears: the automatic architecture of emotion. Ann. N. Y. Acad Sci. 1000 348–366 10.1196/annals.1280.016 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin H. (2014). Red-colored products enhance the attractiveness of women. Displays 35 202–205 10.1016/j.displa.2014.05.009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lindsay D. T., Brown A. M., Reijnen E., Rich A. N., Kuzmova Y. I., Wolfe J. M. (2010). Color channels, not color appearance of color categories, guide visual search for desaturated color targets. Psychol. Sci. 21 1208–1214 10.1177/0956797610379861 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Little A. C., Hill R. A. (2007). Attribution to red suggests special role in dominance signaling. J. Evol. Psychol. 5 161–168 10.1556/JEP.2007.1008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lockley S. W., Evans E. E., Scheer F. A., Brainard G. C., Czeisler C. A., Aeschbach D. (2006). Short-wavelength sensitivity for the direct effects of light on alertness, vigilance, and the waking electroencephalogram in humans. Sleep 29 161–168. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lynn M., Giebelhausen M., Garcia S., Li Y., Patumanon I. Clothing color and tipping: an attempted replication and extension. J. Hosp. Tourism Res. doi: 10.1177/1096348013504001. (in press) [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maier M. A., Hill R., Elliot A. J., Barton R. A. (in press) “Color in achievement contexts in humans,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Maxwell S. (2004). The persistence of underpowered studies in psychological research: causes and consequences. Psychol. Methods 9 147–163 10.1037/1082-989X.9.2.147 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mehta R., Zhu R. (2009). Blue or red? Exploring the effect of color on cognitive task performances. Science 323 1226–1229 10.1126/science.1169144 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meier B. P. (in press) “Do metaphors color our perception of social life?,” in Handbook of Color sychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Meier B. P., Robinson M. D. (2005). The metaphorical representation of affect. Metaphor Symbol. 20 239–257 10.1207/s15327868ms2004_1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Murayama K., Pekrun R., Fiedler K. (2014). Research practices that can prevent an inflation of false-positive rates. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 18 107–118 10.1177/1088868313496330 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nakashian J. S. (1964). The effects of red and green surroundings on behavior. J. Gen. Psychol. 70 143–162 10.1080/00221309.1964.9920584 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Connor Z. (2011). Colour psychology and colour therapy: caveat emptor. Color Res. Appl. 36 229–334 10.1002/col.20597 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pazda A. D., Greitemeyer T. (in press) “Color in romantic contexts in humans,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Piqueras-Fiszman B., Alcaide J., Roura E., Spence C. (2012). Is it the plate or is it the food? Assessing the influence of the color (black or white) and shape of the plate on the perception of food placed on it. Food Qual. Prefer. 24 205–208 10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.08.011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pomerleau V. J., Fortier-Gauthier U., Corriveau I., Dell’Acqua R., Jolicœur P. (2014). Colour-specific differences in attentional deployment for equiluminant pop-out colours: evidence from lateralized potentials. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 91 194–205 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.10.016 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Prado-León L. R., Rosales-Cinco R. A. (2011). “Effects of lightness and saturation on color associations in the Mexican population,” in New Directions in Colour Studies , eds Biggam C., Hough C., Kay C., Simmons D. (Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins Publishing Company; ), 389–394. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pressey S. L. (1921). The influence of color upon mental and motor efficiency. Am. J. Psychol. 32 327–356 10.2307/1413999 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ridgway J., Myers B. (2014). A study on brand personality: consumers’ perceptions of colours used in fashion brand logos. Int. J. Fash. Des. Tech. Educ. 7 50–57 10.1080/17543266.2013.877987 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts S. C., Owen R. C., Havlicek J. (2010). Distinguishing between perceiver and wearer effects in clothing color-associated attributions. Evol. Psychol. 8 350–364. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross C. F., Bohlscheid J., Weller K. (2008). Influence of visual masking technique on the assessment of 2 red wines by trained consumer assessors. J. Food Sci. 73 S279–S285 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.00824.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rutchick A. M., Slepian M. L., Ferris B. D. (2010). The pen is mightier than the word: object priming of evaluative standards. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 40 704–708 10.1002/ejsp.753 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sahin L., Figuerio M. G. (2013). Alerting effects of short-wavelength (blue) and long-wavelength (red) lights in the afternoon. Physiol. Behav. 116 1–7 10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.03.014 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwarz S., Singer M. (2013). Romantic red revisited: red enhances men’s attraction to young, but not menopausal women. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49 161–164 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.08.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Setchell J. (in press) “Color in competition contexts in non-human animals,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Shi J., Zhang C., Jiang F. (2015). Does red undermine individuals’ intellectual performance? A test in China. Int. J. Psychol. 50 81–84 10.1002/ijop.12076 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sloane P. (1991). Primary Sources, Selected Writings on Color from Aristotle to Albers . New York, NY: Design Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smajic A., Merritt S., Banister C., Blinebry A. (2014). The red effect, anxiety, and exam performance: a multistudy examination. Teach. Psychol. 41 37–43 10.1177/0098628313514176 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sokolik K., Magee R. G., Ivory J. D. (2014). Red-hot and ice-cold ads: the influence of web ads’ warm and cool colors on click-through ways. J. Interact. Advert. 14 31–37 10.1080/15252019.2014.907757 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Soldat A. S., Sinclair R. C., Mark M. M. (1997). Color as an environmental processing cue: external affective cues can directly affect processing strategy without affecting mood. Soc. Cogn. 15 55–71 10.1521/soco.1997.15.1.55 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sorokowski P., Szmajke A. (2007). How does the “red wins: effect work? The role of sportswear colour during sport competitions. Pol. J. Appl. Psychol. 5 71–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sorokowski P., Szmajke A., Hamamura T., Jiang F., Sorakowska A. (2014). “Red wins,” “black wins,” “blue loses” effects are in the eye of the beholder, but they are culturally niversal: a cross-cultural analysis of the influence of outfit colours on sports performance. Pol. Psychol. Bull. 45 318–325 10.2478/ppb-2014-0039 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spence C. (in press) “Eating with our eyes,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Spence C., Velasco C., Knoeferle K. (2014). A large sampled study on the influence of the multisensory environment on the wine drinking experience. Flavour 3 8 10.1186/2044-7248-3-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steele K. M. (2014). Failure to replicate the Mehta and Zhu (2009) color-priming effect on anagram solution times. Psychon. B. Rev. 21 771–776 10.3758/s13423-013-0548-3 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephen I. D., Law Smith M. J., Stirrat M. R., Perrett D. I. (2009). Facial skin coloration affects perceived health of human faces. Int. J. Primatol. 30 845–857 10.1007/s10764-009-9380-z [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephen I. D., McKeegan A. M. (2010). Lip colour affects perceived sex typicality and attractiveness of human faces. Perception 39 1104–1110 10.1068/p6730 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephen I. D., Oldham F. H., Perrett D. I., Barton R. A. (2012a). Redness enhances perceived aggression, dominance and attractiveness in men’s faces. Evol. Psychol. 10 562–572. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephen I. D., Scott I. M. L., Coetzee V., Pound N., Perrett D. I., Penton-Voak I. S. (2012b). Cross-cultural effects of color, but not morphological masculinity, on perceived attractiveness of men’s faces. Evol. Hum. Behav. 33 260–267 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.10.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephen I. D., Perrett D. I. (in press) “Color and face perception,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Stockman A., Brainard D. H. (in press) “Fundamentals of color vision I: processing in the eye,” in Handbook of Color Psychology , eds Elliot A., Fairchild M., Franklin A. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Taillard J., Capelli A., Sagaspe P., Anund A., Akerstadt T. (2012). In-car nocturnal blue light exposure improves motorway driving: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE 7 : e46750 10.1371/journal.pone.0046750 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tan K. W., Stephen I. D. (2012). Colour detection thresholds in faces and colour patches. Perception 42 733–741 10.1068/p7499 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tanaka A., Tokuno Y. (2011). The effect of the color red on avoidance motivation. Soc. Behav. Pers. 39 287–288 10.2224/sbp.2011.39.2.287 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tchernikov I., Fallah M. (2010). A color hierarchy for automatic target selection. PLoS ONE 5 : e9338 10.1371/journal.pone.0009338 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thorstenson C. A. Functional equivalence of the color red and enacted avoidance behavior? Replication and empirical integration. Soc. Psychol. (in press) [ Google Scholar ]
• Tracy J. L., Beall A. T. (2014). The impact of weather on women’s tendency to wear red pink when at high risk for conception. PLoS ONE 9 : e88852 10.1371/journal.pone.0088852 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ten Velden F. S., Baas M., Shalvi S., Preenen P. T. Y., De Dreu C. K. W. (2012). In competitive interaction displays of red increase actors’ competitive approach and perceivers’ withdrawal. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol . 48 1205–1208 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.04.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Valdez P., Mehrabian A. (1994). Effects of color on emotions. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 123 394–409 10.1037/0096-3445.123.4.394 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Ittersum K., Wansink B. (2012). Plate size and color suggestability, The Deboeuf Illusion’s bias on serving and eating behavior. J. Consum. Res. 39 215–228 10.1086/662615 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vandewalle G., Schmidt C., Albouy G., Sterpenich V., Darsaud A., Rauchs G., et al. (2007). Brain responses to violet, blue, and green monochromatic light exposures in humans: prominent role of blue light and the brainstem. PLoS ONE 11 : e1247 10.1371/journal.pone.0001247 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Viola A. U., James L. M., Schlangen L. J. M., Dijk D. J. (2008). Blue-enriched white lightin the workplace improves self-reported alertness, performance and sleep quality. Scan. J. Work Environ. Health 34 297–306 10.5271/sjweh.1268 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitfield T. W., Wiltshire T. J. (1990). Color psychology: a critical review. Gen. Soc. Gen. Psychol. 116 385–411. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yamazaki A. K. (2010). An analysis of background-color effects on the scores of a computer-based English test. KES Part II LNI. 6277 630–636 10.1007/978-3-642-15390-7_65 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Young S. The effect of red on male perceptions of female attractiveness: moderationby baseline attractiveness of female faces. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol . (in press) [ Google Scholar ]
• Yüksel A. (2009). Exterior color and perceived retail crowding: effects on tourists’ shoppingquality inferences and approach behaviors. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tourism 10 233–254 10.1080/15280080903183383 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zanna M. P., Fazio R. H. (1982). “The attitude behavior relation: Moving toward a third generation of research,” in The Ontario Symposium , Vol. 2 eds Zanna M., Higgins E. T., Herman C. (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.), 283–301. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang T., Han B. (2014). Experience reverses the red effect among Chinese stockbrokers. PLoS ONE 9 : e89193 10.1371/journal.pone.0089193 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Scientific Consensus

It’s important to remember that scientists always focus on the evidence, not on opinions. Scientific evidence continues to show that human activities ( primarily the human burning of fossil fuels ) have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn have continued to impact Earth’s climate . This is based on over a century of scientific evidence forming the structural backbone of today's civilization.

NASA Global Climate Change presents the state of scientific knowledge about climate change while highlighting the role NASA plays in better understanding our home planet. This effort includes citing multiple peer-reviewed studies from research groups across the world, 1 illustrating the accuracy and consensus of research results (in this case, the scientific consensus on climate change) consistent with NASA’s scientific research portfolio.

With that said, multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals 1 show that climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

American Scientific Societies

Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations.

"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009) 2

American Association for the Advancement of Science

"Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening." (2014) 3

American Chemical Society

"The Earth’s climate is changing in response to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and particulate matter in the atmosphere, largely as the result of human activities." (2016-2019) 4

American Geophysical Union

"Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019) 5

American Medical Association

"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019) 6

American Meteorological Society

"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019) 7

American Physical Society

"Earth's changing climate is a critical issue and poses the risk of significant environmental, social and economic disruptions around the globe. While natural sources of climate variability are significant, multiple lines of evidence indicate that human influences have had an increasingly dominant effect on global climate warming observed since the mid-twentieth century." (2015) 8

The Geological Society of America

"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2011), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (Melillo et al., 2014) that global climate has warmed in response to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases ... Human activities (mainly greenhouse-gas emissions) are the dominant cause of the rapid warming since the middle 1900s (IPCC, 2013)." (2015) 9

Science Academies

International academies: joint statement.

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies) 1 0

U.S. National Academy of Sciences

"Scientists have known for some time, from multiple lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate, primarily through greenhouse gas emissions." 1 1

U.S. Government Agencies

U.s. global change research program.

"Earth’s climate is now changing faster than at any point in the history of modern civilization, primarily as a result of human activities." (2018, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies) 12

Intergovernmental Bodies

Intergovernmental panel on climate change.

“It is unequivocal that the increase of CO 2 , methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere over the industrial era is the result of human activities and that human influence is the principal driver of many changes observed across the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere. “Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on the warming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact.” 1 3-17

Other Resources

List of worldwide scientific organizations.

The following page lists the nearly 200 worldwide scientific organizations that hold the position that climate change has been caused by human action. http://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

U.S. Agencies

The following page contains information on what federal agencies are doing to adapt to climate change. https://www.c2es.org/site/assets/uploads/2012/02/climate-change-adaptation-what-federal-agencies-are-doing.pdf

Technically, a “consensus” is a general agreement of opinion, but the scientific method steers us away from this to an objective framework. In science, facts or observations are explained by a hypothesis (a statement of a possible explanation for some natural phenomenon), which can then be tested and retested until it is refuted (or disproved).

As scientists gather more observations, they will build off one explanation and add details to complete the picture. Eventually, a group of hypotheses might be integrated and generalized into a scientific theory, a scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena.

1. K. Myers, et al, "Consensus revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years later", Environmental Research Letters Vol.16 No. 10, 104030 (20 October 2021); DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774 M. Lynas, et al, "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature", Environmental Research Letters Vol.16 No. 11, 114005 (19 October 2021); DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966 J. Cook et al., "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming", Environmental Research Letters Vol. 11 No. 4, (13 April 2016); DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002 J. Cook et al., "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature", Environmental Research Letters Vol. 8 No. 2, (15 May 2013); DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 W. R. L. Anderegg, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol. 107 No. 27, 12107-12109 (21 June 2010); DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003187107 P. T. Doran & M. K. Zimmerman, "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change", Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union Vol. 90 Issue 3 (2009), 22; DOI: 10.1029/2009EO030002 N. Oreskes, “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change”, Science Vol. 306 no. 5702, p. 1686 (3 December 2004); DOI: 10.1126/science.1103618

2. Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations (2009)

3. AAAS Board Statement on Climate Change (2014)

4. ACS Public Policy Statement: Climate Change (2016-2019)

5. Society Must Address the Growing Climate Crisis Now (2019)

6. Global Climate Change and Human Health (2019)

7. Climate Change: An Information Statement of the American Meteorological Society (2019)

8. American Physical Society (2021)

9. GSA Position Statement on Climate Change (2015)

10. Joint science academies' statement: Global response to climate change (2005)

11. Climate at the National Academies

12. Fourth National Climate Assessment: Volume II (2018)

13. IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers, SPM 1.1 (2014)

14. IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers, SPM 1 (2014)

15. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (2021)

16. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group 2 (2022)

17. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group 3 (2022)

Discover More Topics From NASA

Explore Earth Science

Earth Science in Action

Earth Science Data

Facts About Earth

Help | Advanced Search

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology

Title: what an event is not: unravelling the identity of events in quantum theory and gravity.

Abstract: We explore the notion of events at the intersection between quantum physics and gravity, inspired by recent research on superpositions of semiclassical spacetimes. By going through various experiments and thought experiments -- from a decaying atom, to the double-slit experiment, to the quantum switch -- we analyse which properties can and cannot be used to define events in such non-classical contexts. Our findings suggest an operational, context-dependent definition of events which emphasises that their properties can be accessed without destroying or altering observed phenomena. We discuss the implications of this understanding of events for indefinite causal order as well as the non-absoluteness of events in the Wigner's friend thought experiment. These findings provide a first step for developing a notion of event in quantum spacetime.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• HTML (experimental)
• Other Formats

References & Citations

• INSPIRE HEP
• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Exploring the factors that influence continued use of sharing economic platforms: Insights from idle fish

• Author & abstract
• Related works & more

Corrections

• Shengxiang She
• Yaoping Liu
• Daranee Pimchangthong
• Pharath Run
• Khoirul Anwar

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection Research Paper

I watched the Case Conceptualization and Theory discussion video, which helped me reevaluate my knowledge and make new conclusions. I have assessed my current understanding of the recently learned topics by pausing the video and reflecting on my own thoughts about the therapies, after which I compared them to what was expressed in the discussion. As a result, I made several significant conclusions regarding the material.

I have primarily focused on comprehending the differences between solution-focused therapy (SFT), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and psychodynamic therapy. As such, SFT is a quick, goal-oriented kind of psychotherapy in which the client is assisted in discovering, clarifying, and implementing their solutions to difficulties. Setting clear, precise, and achievable goals is a substantial focus of the process. CBT is predicated on discovering practical answers to problems that are now giving the patient misery. CBT focuses on detecting negative thinking patterns in life and using direct action to change those troublesome behaviors and attitudes. Finally, self-reflection and self-examination are used in psychodynamic therapy to uncover the psychological underpinnings of emotional pain. Psychodynamic treatment also focuses on recognizing patterns and interpersonal interactions and encouraging free associations.

Hence, psychodynamic treatment focuses on emotions, whereas CBT and SFT concentrate on thinking and beliefs. SFT varies from CBT in a number of ways as well. Psychodynamic therapy is a type of psychoanalysis that aims to understand one’s current condition and behavior by relating them to events in the past. However, CBT and SFT primarily concentrate on the present day. Next, SFT spends less time defining the actual problem and instead focuses on potential solutions, whereas CBT demands a precise, thorough statement of the problem. Finally, CBT views change as a relatively short process, whereas psychodynamic therapy views change as a lengthy process. The goal of psychodynamic therapy is for the patient to acquire insight, whereas the purpose of CBT is for the client to transform.

Furthermore, the difference in purpose and use of the described approaches has made me wonder whether the different theories could be used simultaneously. I decided that although the theories imply other techniques and methodologies, their benefits might be helpful for dealing with multiple psychological problems of the client. I believe that since psychology is a vast area with much to learn about individual mental health disorders, it is hard to declare with absolute certainty that one type of therapy is superior to another.

A much more practical approach is to view the mentioned treatment options as alternative strategies to mitigate and control present conditions or actions that, when used together, can yield a more effective outcome. Thus, some techniques are better suited to various people, but that does not decrease the relevance of psychological approaches to well-being. Moreover, the most crucial aspect of receiving mental health treatment is selecting a style of therapy tailored to the customer’s specific requirements. Therapy assists persons who get therapy in ways suitable for the condition, mental disorder, or trauma addressed, which does not prohibit multiple approaches.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, April 2). Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection. https://ivypanda.com/essays/case-conceptualization-and-theory-reflection/

"Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection." IvyPanda , 2 Apr. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/case-conceptualization-and-theory-reflection/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection'. 2 April.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection." April 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/case-conceptualization-and-theory-reflection/.

1. IvyPanda . "Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection." April 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/case-conceptualization-and-theory-reflection/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Case Conceptualization and Theory: Reflection." April 2, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/case-conceptualization-and-theory-reflection/.

• “Speaking for Themselves” (SFT) Program
• Solution-Focused Brief Therapy Concepts
• The Concept of Strategic Family Therapy
• Structural Family Therapy Model
• Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution
• Vulnerable Population in Biopsychosocial Assessment
• Psychodynamic Play Theory
• Psychodynamic and Humanistic Theories
• Significance of Psychodynamics in Conflict Analysis
• Validity of Psychodynamic Theories
• "An Advanced Lifespan Odyssey…" by Erford & Tucker
• Owen Suskind as a Patient in the Life, Animated Film
• Wundt’s Works on Cognitive Processes
• Age-Appropriate Psychosocial Development Activities
• Cognitive Development Activities for Children