cen introdeation to speculation 16 Bt James.G. March, Charles A. Lave Introduct ‘New York: EarperCollins, 1975, INTRODUCTION ‘The Dest: way to lears about medel building fe to do it. In this charter we invite you to spezuate abou! human behavior. The procedure we have ado-ted is a femiliar on2. It is used by novelists in doveloping charactass or everts, by hittorians in interpreting history, by children in ‘raining taeir rareats, and by astronomers in creasing theories of 3e univerve, Despite such testimonials. our prosedure is not the only proczdure for examining human yehavior. Intelligent people citer on how to give meaning to observable phenemena, They differ even ‘more on © variety of special issaes that ve will happily ignore If we had sone unique vision of the only way to approach social science, we wold be dilighted tc present t. If we knew of seme ‘majcr new solutions to she anciert complications of zhe search for interesting meenings, ws would hurry to amounce them Our inten- tions are incomparably more modest. We ave found one commen approsch to interpreting humaa Behavier Foth fruitful and exjoy~ able. We hope you may Bnd it similarly revarding. In this chapter we ask vou to prastice your shail at imagining spectlaions. In each section we start wih an observation and then speculate sbout processes that might have protced the ob- served fact. The examples are all taken from the word of ordinary experience: gevernment, college life, friendship, and population control. They even inclede one example drawn from the physical world simply to demonstrate that the p-ocess of speaulation is fun there too, 22 CONTACT AND FRIENDSHIP ‘Suppose we were interested in the patterns of friendship among college students Why are some people friemis and net others? We mish: begin by asking all of the residents of single reoms along particular dcrmitory corridor te elve us a list of their friends, ‘These Viste of friends are our inicial data, the result we wish to ondexstand, If we stare at the lists for a while see whet they mean, Me eventually notice a pattern in chem: Friends tené to live lose ‘to each other: they tend to have edjacent dormitory rooms. What oes this mean? What miocess coud have produced this pattern of friendship? = tior: to Modzls in the Social Sciences, contact and friends Ore feature of this beak is that we wil often ask you to stop and do some thinking. We are serious. STOP AND THINK. Devote 1 monents time to thinking of a possible process that might procuce this observed result One possible process that might have led to this result is the following: ys stents tc Bich spring the director of emmous hosing allows studen Inileste thelr dormitor’ room preterenes forthe falling Yea? rove of funds take advantage of ts ead ask to have cect Stbor a roomsaiee ora be pun adjacn rooms. ‘ais processis@ speculation about a prior world If he rei sword ha nce bern lke Our togel worl, her Gre observed fact ‘Would have beon a loieal conseqveree. ‘Tat is, this roblems (Zor example, dirty streets, landlord problems, school issues) ereates the incentive to éiscover shared values. Since cur current model places prmary emphasis on the pattern of communication, you night wisa to add some specala- ‘one of the following kids: 1. Friends tené to communicate about common vanes; enemies communicate about differing values. As ¢ resilt, two people ho start out baing friends (either throagh chance or positive expectations) will become better *riends; two people who star; oi Ddeing enemies will becone worse enemies. 2. Sitvations in which there is general social agreement about appropriate behavior and eppropriate interpretations o? be- Aavior will mere likely produce communication about-shared valuss shan will situstions in which there is Jess general agveement, Thus ‘ato persons who initially meet iz a well-deined, normatively reg3- tee situatior will be more likely to he:ome friends than if they aad met in normatively unreguleted situations, (Could this be possible reasam why stable soceties impese relatively elaberate Doliteness rules for first eneounters mong people?) 8. Strangers would rather he friends than enemies (becuse enemies are more “expensive.”) Thus twe people initially try 20 tommunicate about shared values “Mistakes” oceur ‘vhen a perscn yuesees wrong about which values are shared, or when he is forced “e communicate to an audience #f several different people. Thus wo Jersons from similar cultures.are more likely to Eecome friends chan two persone from differen: cultures, On the average, the imaler the group within whica a first encounter between to perams occur, the mors likely they are to become friends. Or the average, the lerger the group of strangers, the more inane the con- versation, This s one reason why, counter te intuction, large parties of strangers are duller than small parties of strangers, per gallen of liquid served. STOP. If you have takes the time to exercise your imagi- nation at each step of the examples, you sheuld now have 4 sense of the basic nature of the model-building procedure that we are presenting and its pleasures You may find it useful at this point to retrace the process and devote come ‘time to your own speculations rather than ou:s. rook, lakes, end roo 2.8 ROCKS, LAKES, AND RIVERS Not al) sveculation eoacorsa human behavior. We can play the thine gare with sbervatias made about te physi! word figace Bl, for example, shows an ezeavatin bn Southn” Cali fornia, Oujer excavations nea this particular aren all how the tain stature: paral layers of reas with smaler mek and Send betreen thorn Why doe the excvation lok hike tis? What Kind of geological proces might have produced thie end result? How Gite rooks gor there? Why ar they lyered the way they STOP AND THINK. Try t think of some geological process that might have produced this xesult. ‘A possible process might be: ‘Trie ares is actually the bed of ea encfont wcean; the layers ate ‘ihe result of susoessive deposits of rock and sand washed there by the ocean; then the land vas pushed p-out of th» ceean by sone kind of gevlogieal upheaval. ‘This imagined process is a speculation about a prior world. Jf the real wor'd had onee been like our motel world then the observed facts would have been a logical consequence. Thus we have founc ‘a model, © process, that accounts for fhe facts in OSs ag eee ‘igne 2: Grove! pt val thrid tere of rok, Thee at mauris Bu ecigreu, doped from Goslgy Mustntad by oh & Slaton. Breton isd Compe” apo @ Wee Ropadacee wth sermonon ieroluction to weeulatien 18 If our speculaticn about the prior -vorld ie true, are there sny other facts that we should also observe? STOP AND THINK. Trink of seme other consequeness ‘that follow from the mod:l. What are its other observable geologica) implications? Try to think of at Ieast one cther implication before you continue reiding If this were an ancient ocean ‘ed, there shoud aso be marine debris as well as rocks, ‘or example, foss'ls of some lind. A carefal examination of the excavations, however, siows ao fails or cther marine debris This causes us => doubt the ocean-bed modcl, A Zurtier cause of doubts that the surface ef the ground is exactly parallel to the rock layers exposed by the exeavation It is unl:kely ‘hat the land would have been raised exactly streight up out o! the ‘ocean or that subsequent erosion >f the surface coulc have worn it exacily parallel to the fermer floc. So our speculaticn, or medal, about the crigia of this area {s in trouble. The model correctly explains “he layers of rocks, but, unfortunately, it also p-adicts two things “hat are rot true. Thus st is unlikely thar our mcdel is ce-rect. Let us try to think of some other model that might have generated the observed result. STOP. Can you think of an alteraative? ‘An altemative pessible model is: ‘The ares in the pisture was formed by rocks wasied down from the mounteins im she background; torsentisl raise and flocdirg carried the rocks fm the mcuntains; aiceessve livers represent successive foods, Could this alternetive version of the prior world have created ‘the mown results? It does explair the layers of rocks; it predicxs the lack of marine fossils; and +t also pradiets that the surface should he exactly paralkl to the rock laye's, sixce -he process 1s presumably still zoing or in a slow fashion But is tiere anything rods, likes, and rivers ze hat tis now version of the pee weld woul prliet? IE {Se protec he nav inaiowd wore tvs, would W have ll to any saber rosie? STOP AND THINK apout this for a monent. 1 the model were true, we might also exsect that the type ‘f rocks in the excavation will be the same as the type of rocks found in “he mounsains. We might also expect that excavations Closer 20 the mountsins will saew largee rocks than the ones in the ‘crawing, since the large rocks could mot have been washed ao far. ‘And, nelly, we might also expect to find 2 very slight upslope Srom this area toward the mountains, 4 three of these predictions ‘rere confirmed by field work The last model then aprears to be & reasonable speculation 28.1 A MODEL OF TEE MCLEL-BUILDING PROCESS ‘hat the geolopial mone Jd not spec the dats of the Hoods, the Step1 Observe some facts 19fn fntrnductien to mpecution 20 Stoo Lock at the zacts as tioush they were the end result of some un- Jencrom process (model), Then speculate about processes that mizht ave produced such a result ‘Stoo s ‘Then deduce other restits (impleations/emsequences/predietions) from the motel, Sten 4 ‘Then ask yourself whether these other implicctions are true ond projuce new medels if necessary First we started with some facts ‘the rock formatioas 2x- posid by the exzavatioa) that ve wanted to explair. Next we eon- structed an imaginary model rorld (the ocezn bed) that cond hhave produced ‘hese ozserved isets. We hen asked if there were other consequences or predicticas impliee by the inagined snodel world. We found two such pratictions presence of fossils and surcace irregularity) ‘ut discovered that neither prediction was conirmed in the real vorld. So ve rejected our inital guess about tthe prior world and imagined en alternative priox world (foods from the mouniains). This alternative model not only accoanced for all of the kcown facie, but trom it we aleo predicted three now resalts, which vere al] confirmed. Thus w> now fee confident that tine process we imagined is whe: actualy produced the result that we wanted te explain. Therefors, we havea good rode) becasse it ‘explains why the rocks in the excavation leok the way they do. "The explanatory procedure should row be reletively clear: Tt invelves a constant intezplay hebween the “eal worlé and the motel ‘world. The main difference between this explanatory procedure and ‘the ind of thinking we usually do is tha: this protedure is mere systematic and more creative. Ir ordinery thinking when we heve 4 result to explain, we are usual y content to think of some simale expanation anc then stop. This is ineomplete thiaking; it steps befere the process is fully carried out. The real fur is to contirue thirking and sce what other idoas the explanttion can generate, ‘to ask ourselves: 1f this explanation ts co-rect, whet else would it imply? Once you learn todo it exily, yoa vill find panuine creative enieyment assceiated vith this interplay Setween explanation and prediction, ramponsiiity cormerte Governments frequently spocint test forces or commissions to study serious, complex issves such as rrime, unemployment, educa- tion, nareaties, or student umest. Sorcatimes such commicsions are appointed because the sheer complexiiy of @ problem: mikes con- centrsied impartial study 1 necessity. Sometmes they are ap- pointed for political reasons in an effort to bury a currenty contro- vversial, ut probably short-lived, issie. And sometines they are appointed to rubber stamp and legitinize a program thit an_ad- ministrator has already decided he wants to impletrent. The make-up of these commissions is usually very siverss: One often finds conservative dusinessmea, lawye:s, profestors, civil servants, and Jibers) labor unicn leaders all iced together. In spate of the ‘complexity of the issues being investigated, in epite of the variety ‘of metivstion for aprointing the commissions, and ir spite of the diversity of their memberships, there is 2 common pattern in the final reperts of tesk forces or commissions. They often end up criticizing the policies of the goverzment that appointed thems they usually make recommendations “hat ca» Se characcerized a3 moderate; and the members usually agree wianimously or nearly ‘unanimonsly. That is the diversity of opinions on the ecmmission is usually resolved in a modsrate, action-oriented directicn, appar- ently by changing the opirions of the particpants, perticularly those of the more doctrinaire members. For exampls the report of President Nion’s Commission on Campus Unrest vas published in 1970. Amoag the cammission membere were a police chief, a governor, @ newsparer sditor, an attorsey, a law school dear, a retired Air Force general, a uni- versity president, a professi:, and a graduate student. The com- mission 3id not issue the kind of report that might have been expected given the probable initia} biases of its members. The report expressed & gtod deal of eriticsm not oaly tovard students but sso toward the government and universites. Tt said: Mist student protestors are neither violin: nor extrsmist ‘The roots of student activism Ile in unresslvod confiets in ‘our astional life, but the many dofeds of th: miversties have alse fueled campos anrest.... The aniversity's own bouse must be peed in onder... . Aetions—ad inaehort—of government «> Al levels have conteibutad to carps unrex:. The worls of some Delsticalteacers have hslped to same St sax” anfeceerantoffcert hhave too often reacted imeptly or overressted, At times, thels RESPONSIBILITY CORRUPT:on intratusion to epscuation 22 response nas degenerated into uncontrolled vilence, ... We recomend that tae Presidest seek to eonvinze public oficial end protestors alike that divisive and insuing taetorie is dangerous, In the next few pages ve will show the Kind of thought processes carcied out by one of the authors as he sried to under- stand why commissions behave the way they do Sone of the steps that follow took longer to forwrulate than others, and some xe slightly expanded to make the thinking nore expkcit. STOP. Think avout the observation, Why vould commis- sions be moderace (and critical) in “heir reports? See if you ‘can form some speculatioxs of your own, ‘The reading of the newspaper scory abcut the commission fon student unrest and the observation that moderation and a tendency to criticize the government were zommon t» such conmis- sions was the observed result I-vanted to explein. { asked myself how such a result coulé occur; xhat process could Fave led to this result? Thus my first try at an explanatory process vas: People on commisions win ld aberse options atinat Acie 1 comproniae shit bit They Goto ina kindof eadng proces In which wach gaizs te snd cath giv up a ile Thun the inal Foprtrepremnts a ice grount among the A I next tried to lnoaden the model, “o make 4: more general and abstract. The first step was te look al all of the verbs and nouns in the model to see if they could be made less specific, “Conmnis- sion" and “final report” were tmondened rst, since it seems pos- sible that the compromiee proccss is true of all grou behavior. My secood try was: People who hold diverse opinions will tend to pinions iN] tend to cemapromize thir differences and exit up supporting some opinion in the Tidele, sn order te obtain common apreement. Notice that “conmnissione™ was drozped altogether ané that “fal report” was brosdened to become “spinicns.”* This model is brosder than the first :ry, though it is limited to cpinions. Could responssiity correpte any other verbs or nouns be broadensd? Tt seemed possible that behavior might be changed as well. So the language was broadened to ineludeactions as well as cpinions. ‘The third try was: ‘Peaple with conficting goals and cpinions wi. tend fo cempromise ‘ther differenses in order to obtaix common zgreement. ‘The third try was substantially broader than the first, and I now ha} a model with applications in the whole arsa of human Gecision nalsing. Does the meéel work Are its predictions correct? ‘The simplest prediction is that ve should sbserve evidence of compromse in the final reports of task forces. There was such evidence of compromise—the reports always seemed te endorse some position in tae middle of the spectram of origina: opinions hheld by the participants, Bat sometling else ‘vas a'so apparent. ‘There were rarely any strong dissenang “m:nerity reperts.” Nor ‘were there many instances of commission menrbers ‘regudiating” fa report upon ther return'to privale life. Perhaps most of the partisipants had scwally ceanged their qpinions racher thar simply compromised “hem for the sate of the report. If this were ‘rue, it was not a result that would be predicted by the medel. Some other precess mus! bs involved, therefore, and the model must be modiied to take acccunt of it or else be discarded in favor of + different model STOP AND THINK. How would you modify tie model? ‘What sort of process might ead to aa actual change in personal opinions? ‘Why would the oplations of the people 07 the commission te changed as a result of their particigation in che aciivisies of the commission? My first try ata new malel was something ike this: 11 fs easier to hold extreme views if yos are not. confronted ‘ith thelr consequence and if yon are not exposed tc alternative Yews. People on commissions a» have the sizong possibility of having theic reports fplemente) and hen:e are foreed to thirk about the actual consoguences of chair Gecis ons. Itis hard to clirg toextreme ‘dess when faced wits the possfbiity of human misery ‘sulting from them. 28an istreductin to speculation 2h ‘This seemed to be an inte-esting beginning, end I next tried ‘to broaden it ‘The moéel shoulé apply 20 all decisicn-maiting situ- ations, not only to commissions, and st stould apply to acticns as ‘wel a8 opinions. A second try wes People in positions of responsibility tené to moderate their ‘beliefs and actions 2s a resclt of coxfsontation with actual corse- ‘quences and exposare to alternative ideas. ‘The model now suggests a reason Why idealists, of sither the right or the left, tend to modify ther ideologeeal parity end Deomne more moderate once they are give real world responsitili- ties What aboat other possible predictims from the mod:!? Tt predicts the same moderating eect on successful candidates for public office, and there is at Jeast some casual evidence of thie if wwe look at exnpaign utterances and compare tham with subsequent actions while in office. It algo predicts that leaders cf radical move ments (of either left or right) 7ill tend te disappoint their fellows if they achieve office in a larger sphere They will probably be viewed as “sell-onts” to the estaclishment. For other predictions I tried to think of examples of offices differing amoun of responsibility and power. The medel says that it is easier to maintain extremist views in reletively poverless offees. Thus the president of a local chapter of a minor ppol tical social group can easily maintain right-wing views ir spite of seing president. Likewise, a1 antibusiness member of Congress may have his views only alightly moderated by bis baing a eongress- mas, for he is only one vote cet of 435. But the model does say that’ a congressman will exercite the grostest maleration of his ‘views in those areas ir which he has committee assiznments (since committees are more powerful and carry grester responsibility) ; fané similarly the mocel prediets that en thoae occasions waen Congress overvules a committee, the congress.ona. action will be moce extreme (in either direstion) them the committee recom- ‘mendation. Fizally, the model predicts “hat really powerful and responsible positions such as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Cort or President of the United States will have the most efeet ‘upen the men cr women who held them, STOP. Review the argument and the derivations. Are ‘there other spiculations that mizht explain our original the ccte of the dumb question obeervation? Are the others beller or werse than this set of ideas? 25 2.5 THE CASE OF THE DUMB QUESTION So a am wy ep ei Bers Fm ene Gaye gn sly Soe ey eh ee a prvi rs a soa ipo ak aa a a pe ‘Footbal players are dumb. ‘Using this zs « base, can we generalise it inte 2 more in- teresting idea? You might want to begin by bmaden'ng “football player” t» “athlete” producing the folowing new statement ‘Athlases are dumb. ‘The change hes made your model more general (but pot necessarily more sorect), but the model stil has no sense of process. hy might cthletes sppear dumb? Is appearing dumb an [uherent characteristic of poople win are goed at sports? Is it Gue to something that happens after people take up srorts in = serioas way? Or isthere some other explanation? STOP AND THINK, Is there some pessible process that ‘would make athletes appear cumb? Che possibie model far our observations might be: aing « cord athlete requires large amounts of prestice time; being smart in class requires large amoun's of study time, The f2nount of free time i ¢0 limite that yoo samnot both study =n} sractice wel ‘his is a much more genersl explanation. It makes # variety cf interesting predictions. Not only doesit explain why sthlstes appear Gumb in class, bub {talso predicts thst any time-consuming activitycn introduction to speculation 26 ‘will produce the same effect. Thus people wo spend “arge amoun: cf time on student government or the schoo. paper wil also appear ama in class. OF cours, this fe not the cal posstle modal. An elternative might be: S — Bveryone wants to fee) succaful, Acheving recsenition in say ‘one area Is enough 20 make most people content According to thin model, athletes il not work hard 20 tenis reoogition Sn suadamie ork beentwe Chay already a0 Tecopnition te ableton Thus thy will appear Gun in elas (t sho pede fate: nd who sre smeenel Sn si {o'icportan avin (Cor instance tude poli, voll even ‘will appear dumb in class, ze esl 9) ‘Or you misht haw imagined a quite diferent proces We tend tobe sles of succes im ates. When Ww are esas of tomeons we sitet subemarounly to bver his apparent sca im class by interpreting his qxestions as “dumb.” ee According to this mode, athletes (who are corsecthy identified as, athletes) will ask questians that eppear sinsplistic to other persons ‘whe are relatively unsceesfal in ates). Other indiviuals, ‘who are successful in other noracademic pursaite will also ask ‘vhal appear to be dumb question. STOP. Now we have three different models explaining the dumb football player, and andovbtedly you have though: of others. Which of the models is est? We will sonatas: thie qurtion tn ‘he nest shape, Pal you might think a little abcut it now, - = ‘The data collected to tert the vacious ideas of this partially true story were often casual and nonr gorous. & social scientist notiesd that women Faving a sarticula= religious backgromd tended to do better academic work at his un versity than womes having other religious backgrounds. Zeligion 2 maintaias a private educational ‘thy oust of the enart women a7 spstem thet many of ite members attené instead of pubife schools. ‘The Z schocls have a certain amount of religious content, are often relatively scrict, and are usually segregeted by Fe. STOP. Why do Z women do better academic work than non women? What kind of process conld prodeee this resuit? ‘The social scientist who made she initia’ observation im- mediately thought oF two possible explmations: Model 1. 2 women are inberently smerter chen non-Z Model 2. There is something special sbcut Z higk schools thas prepares stadents better fo: college work, ‘Motel 1 is not a good meade! becasse it has 20 sense 0: process 1» it, Nonetheless, there is a possible test to check it out. We might imply give 1Q tests to random samples of Z and noo-Z girls in Srder to test the assumptions cf the mcdel, As a general Tale, how Gver, we vill discourage assumption testing as a way of vilidating model, little bit of imagination dexoted to Icoking for testable predictions will generally be more prefitable, Tr this case we sus- pect, from genera. biological knowledge, that if there were a fystemati: geneticlinked difference between ch: inteligence of Z women ard that of nox-Z women, ther: would bs 2 simila~ system= atie difference between Z men and naw-Z mex. Now we can avoid he tedions taske of admainistering imelligence teste to 2veryone. Insteed, ve simply (and cleverly) chedr to see if Z men heve better grade records thar non-Z mea. We de so and discover tat there is no difference between the two groups of mex. This leads us to doubt Model 1. ‘Model 2 asserts that there is something superior about the 2 ‘schools. But if this were true, then again we would expect Z men to be outstanding compared to non-Z men. Perkaps it is only the Z ‘women's schools that are special, however. Cacusl conversation with Z men sud women did not reveal any plausible differences between the 7 sckools that they attorded. Thus Model 2 does not geet valié‘on introduction to apsonlation cithes, althouga ve migh: want ts Keep it in mini. Tae differences ‘between schools might be subtle. Are there eny alternative models? STOP AND THINK. Wet other explanstiors might there be for the social scientist's observation? Hf you have read say moders discussions or edveated women, you might have though: of the following model, which was also ‘suggested by one of the Z women: Model 2. Men seem to confuse masculinity ani intelligence; ‘a smart woman i threatexing to them. So when a woman shows ber intelligence, she gets orltibized or imored. After ‘2 while, women Wao want male approval ‘ears to act damb 80 8 not to offené men. Since the Z echools are segregated ‘by sex, thelr worsen gradcates haven't been conditioned to ‘be guie: in class and play dumb. With cnly other women around they get more chee to develop ther intellectual potenti. dee in te il he ys oi ds ee cee ee erases omen eas ta orto Se en eee tas = Zwomen sheuld graivally, over time, become conditioned by heir new college exwironment. So the difference between Z vomen ani non-Z women should be much smaller in senior ccasses than in freshmen clases. ‘There are many noncceducational colleges. Greduaces of women's colleges should do better in graduate school than women grada- ates of coeiucationa: collexes, 38. Some women are larzely indifferent to aiditional znale approval, erhape because they are stroogly career oriantel, perhaps be- ‘cause they are certzin of ther standing (either high or low) among men. Women in career-criented programe will do bettar than women in libers) arts programs; womex wro are mazried will do better than voren who are net; wemer who are dis- ttnetively unattractive to men will de better chan others. ‘on becoming © evil volentia: STGP. Is Model 3 a good one? Dr are there other nodels? Perhaps professers like the way in which Zwomen deal with teachers. Maybe you can think of some o:her explanation. Sec what predictions yon can devive from your own model. Bocrultmest into college majors is not a random process; rather, there are systematic biases In the motivatiom, attituces, and bilities of students who eele:t certain majers. Studems make Choices thet at least In a modest war match their expectations oout u field with thelr own ospiraticas and their own views of heir personal abilities, Covmeling trom parents, frierds, and eachers guides a student into a cormitmert that je rilatively toneistent with his talents, As a resul, studeats with grater in: vGrost und aptitude ‘n ert are dispropor-ionately represented among. Bet majoxs, and students with grestir interssy and apfitude in fmathemaGes are disproportionately represented among mathe. fnatics majors. In a reasonably efficient “market” these simple nechanisns serve to ettract students o interests and carzers that fre generally consistent with ‘heir abilities; kut, as we know well from an sxamnination of the ways in which sex biasts parmeates such a eystem, the market is far from perfect STOP. Think about how you might :o:m a model of the process by which people become committed tof field of Suidy. Hin‘: Maybe they leirn to lice what they are cod at Consider the following simple model of tre proves: 1. ‘Thers exists a set of alternative fields (for example, politics! seiense, history, mathemaics). 2, ‘Thers is a set of basie ability dirrensions (for examale, verbs fuensy, problem solving, imagery!. Success in the vasious elds Gepeads opon the possession of some combinatior of these alerts; the talents leading to success ir the varous felds fover'ap considerably, though they are not identical There is slso a random companent (error, in suesess within each felé 2 A SOCIAL SCIENTISTcon sntroheton to speculation 80 Tw magne of ha randon: component varies De pena vais fom fel to 8 Hach cht ss characrizad ra vale (eare) en each Este Atiity dimension: Altough th corrdaton unong Tee ales Iseteocaiy posto, es ot perfect Inia, 4S has mo pefernes among ise fea; eiren Gevolop barons ante back of experience tontny fo prefer tse bt ey Say madly sabre ‘Speriencan (infer ae pond) to iesenae te tne peti fields that ere preferred. : ee Within the model th procts by whch pefernces ae 6- veloped is simple A eb Ie prowed pit 8 ania of port tes chome tn acadeniefterets coke ie ade on the tab Ot ini preferenten sone level levee oars expert Geperding on the relation among the child’s abilities the abil:ties scenery fn cae i fetes tendon compet erences anon tie wuts alieraativentaree ae modelo ‘the basis of success. steenal = ae Buchs node i hardly acequste co explain a features the cites of mari ue, however, saptre (or a lest oe Siert with) she siajr feature of ese recoved. docking About (2) individual abiey (2) the Futon betwen talent ent Perfocmanoe i ald, ad (8) lnlvduad arn or pefeereen STOP AND THINK. Whst docs the model leave out? Are ‘there impartant factors onitied by this cimpliieation? You may have nol two eimapicuous actors that have been ignored by our gradual commitment model. we 1 Market Value. A strict adaptation modal ignores anticipations of future economic ani eocia) euccesses associated with various occupations and thus with vacions fields. At east some of the ecthusiasm for medicine as 2 career stams from expectations or the part of students (and their parents) of the seonomic an} social position that svch a career confers 2 Sceiat Norms. The aopropric:eness of sertain fidds (and cex- ce becoming & pal eciotit tain telents) fo: certain people is regulated by sozial rules as well as by adaptction t> intrins'> talen:. Most corspicuous fzong rules are the reguletions rdated to ethnic croxp status ‘and sex. Moreover, expectations with respect te the match between ethnic group or 26x on the one hend and per‘ormance fon the other form a major filter for te interpreation of sueceess. ‘This description of an tadividusl adaptctin model subject to the outsice press of the market and sycial norms is reasmable. It is also prima facie eficient and neutzal; the process wil tend to ‘match up abilities and interests. ‘Tre model slsc prediets some cther thinzs. For example, it predicts chat the speed of commeitmert by an iadividaal to @ field ‘will depend on the variance of abilities in the ndivicual (that is Ghose whose abilities are relatively specialized will becxme com- yitted eerlier than those whose abilty levels are relatively equal for a wile range of fields); on the relative specialisation of the field (that is, fields requiring abilities that ave not reuired by other fieds will tend to secure commitment relative'y early) ; om the geneval level of ability of the inlividual that is, those with relatively high ability will tend to be:ome committed be'ore those ‘with relatively low ability); and on the magniude of tke random component in determining suocess in a field (that is, fede with = thigh random component wil tend to secure later commisment ané to atsract relatively lass able individuals) “According to this medel, the social and behav.orel sciences, for example, will tend to rec-uit those students with high abilities fn relevent areas, dlthough it will lore some scudents having high social science abliity to other fields vhen those students also had hhigh ablities relevant to che other fields (particularly to felds ‘with heavy overlep in the abilities mquired far suczeee). Subject to “errors” in allneation due to charee elemerts in rewards, tim: Iimitatiens on experience, variations in markt valves, and social norms, *he process tllocates students to the places in which thelr abilities lie "he errors of alloca:ian, however, are important: If we are interested in understanding some features of how one becomes social science major, we may be part cularly irteresiad in discover ing features in tae process that mirht prodwe systematic errors in the eacice of social seieree, 81‘an intradseton 1 epreuation 82 STOP. Review te procs we hare speciied, Con ou foc any way in which these ection of & socal ence mejor might be systematically bsed? ar nk ore eprint neat 2 so we re tree ne eae or RS AS i ae wid ra inet at A act ee Sheena rary aioe, Goce (ca a Shes Tinie en tenes eee Se tn eclpchaeae arta ee Stas nea cana eel om eee foe S auea yet oe fe eee ae eee ae ses airy maha ae tate Noe Se un ee er sacs neha neti oe ene tote Samm rts mt ss sonny tk teow emer they are associated (quite inappropriately} with a rejection of cea once a a see pied wn ie en ol RE cea ee ce att eetn cae studerts of rela:ivaly low ability do. on the average, beter in social Ge ae nla cts are ie eo fae ae eee ieee =, Since the abilities appropriate to te social and behavioral sci- fences are similar to, of correlated with, the abilities eprropriate fo files more commonly offered at the preccllegiate level (for exzmpe, mathematics, natural aciesce, history, Englisk), many Studenie with bigh potential for work in social science will rave burned to prefer (and have a commitment to) another field br the time they come to collem=, 2. A disproportionate share of those students vho say they want ‘fo be social scientists on entering college will be ‘residual Staderts,” students who have not 5 yet found a field for cor titment. In effect, this means that many wil be students who ‘are net particularly good at mathematics, physics, cremistry, English, histors, or biology. 3, Imvofer as a student has learned to prefer social science tn his precollegiats training, he will have learred to preier social seienee in terms of some cormbine‘ion of cuzrent everts, social ard Tuman problems, ani institutional decription, or (dis- proportionately) because of error in tke earlier evaluation scherre, ‘The fundamental conclusion cau be stated in a grossly simple ‘way: Hf sur model is correct, many social science students will be either inept ot nevestary slils or persuaded trat those skills are irvelevart; many stuients with the sslls necessary for social sci fence wil be strongly cormitted to competitive fields long before College or graduate sthool. This will be true in general, out it will be less tue of individuals ‘for instance, women, blacks: who are channeled into socia) geience by social norms than of other groups: St will te Tess trus of fields that provide good economic prospects (for instance, ecoxoniies, law) than ether fel. ‘We have ponéered the implications of such a model for the teaching of social science. As teachers, we ave sometimes feared that sone of our students might be expecting the wrens things from sovial science; that gome students who vould 3¢ rood social scientists never took the rtht courses; and tat some of the en thusiasn and intelligence of our students vas buried beneat’ learned instinets for pedartry. This book, ia fact, io partial re- ‘sponse fo these cencerns. ‘We have also pondered the implicatioss of the model far understanding why we became soci! scientisis. Wes it really be- cause we were net Very good at anything else We do not think 20, ‘and we have taken solace in the otservatien that goo¢ models ofen dntredution © spordation 34 humax behavior are rarely precise interpritations cf individaal actions. For example, suppove one of our modek generates the follow. {ing prediction: Wealthy people tend to be more poitically can. secvative than pocr people. This is a good prediction ebout human behavior. But it does not neceseari’: describe an individual. Former ‘Mayor Lindsay of New York is beth wealthy and likeral. So are many other people. We do not expect such a model to predict irdi- vidual homan behavior; we only expect it “0 predict appreciably Detter than chanes, If we questicacd wealtiy people about their elitical views ané discovered that 603% were conservative, while rly 21% of poor people were con=rvative, we would say that she model did a reasonably good job of predicting aggregate human Ddehavior. ‘The prediction tha: wealthy ndividuak will tenc to be politi. cally conservative is still useful ami interesting even if you know some wealthy individuals who are rot. Thus if you were soliciting voles for = liberal cause, you wold know that your chances of obtaining support from waalthy pecple would be re'atively low. You might concentrate your efforts on other segmants cf the popalation and acvertise in Newsweek rather “han in the Wall Serest Jourval ‘Thus although our mods} of how errors are mace in the cis covery of an inierest in social science suggests that there will be ‘more mistakes in social scionce thar in some ther elds, it daes nat necessarily spply to us, or to you. On the ether hand, even if it oes apply and we are here for al kinds of “erreneods” reasons, ‘we have nevertheless rather grows to like it; and you might ako, 2.8 PEE POLITICS OF POPULATION ‘Hamas societies sometimes face = population problem. A popila- tien problem exists when :t is generally agreed withir the society that the natural processes of birth and deith ave creating e20- namic or socia) difficulties and ssould be modifisd. Historically, Giferent societies have reacted to this situation in diferent ways. For example, some sociecies have increased the averge life 2x- pectancy of thelr citizens through improvec health-care systems, ‘Same societies have incressed the death rats selectively with respect to age,sex, and social class througés wars, infanticide, ar inefficient health care, Some societies have dicreased, ex incroased, the birth rate through medifying social norms with respect $0 hemosexualty the pokitin of poputatios or macriaze, through encouraging worsen to work outside the home tr to star home, through contraceptives, or throust moral per- STOP. Since this kind of cuestion is profoundly im- portant ethically, we might wish to specula:e shout the process by which societies arrive at he did rot bother te go by his ofice and find the homework papers. Model 2. You becone a prozsssor by learnixg te be a good Problem so'ver. Good roblem solving invelvee alzcost single- tare rales of hum for model building miaded coneeniration. So the yrofessor cccasionally forgets to 0 one thing becauce he is coacentratirg on anotner. —— de 2: Deetp Interesting Implications Much of the fu eel beng in fvtiegineren ng iplntons ae i the problems cocci ith ts sowae Yh WET Fopactily be cbed v0 devenp tteesting implications Yoo sone moka Whether something in consiaere! intrest Le abotewly awoalnes e judpment, Dit thee & 0 good Bec jor producing icrsting gridctons: Look for vera exper ments Example oe n uninteresting predieticn from Model 1 vould be: Mako atteetue hin seusenta more, and be wil then Eoome Tet Pietat inde, Or from Model 27 Set the profesor £9 WORK On eae oblems, ane he wl beome les absext-ninded These ae altivay eninterenting because they anes ovum an experiment Tainan in which we probably cannot te way to fd Tore intersting predictions s to thik aboot tie proses involved in each ‘del and cen lok for nara ‘rane tn whic Ce hey variables tho proves vay. In Model 2 frexanple it ienet simpe to very the difeatty of the professor's Sresions, but you san easly And snstances of similar situations Biv hence enn preict thr people (osinessexectives architect Tey Soscher ie other socupatins that cemand concentrated, aet ough wl oxagonaly corget thigs, feo, OF ¥00 ch aoadic that the professer will be just a5 abseni-mnded when reek dn ie Laboratory researth ae. when he is engaged in ‘esehles fox Mod 1, yu cannot vastly wate the prfessor value A| introdsatn to epoowation 2 som given class of students more, bat you saz seaxch for natural cceurrerces of this event. For example, i zou believe that he value tre students in his graduate research seminar nore than the students in his freshman introductory class, you would prediat less absent-minded behavior with reszect to th? graduats students, Suppose you did make such sbservaticns and discovered tnat he was equally Jorgetful in ais graduate clasies; and furthermore that his fresiames lectures are well prepared, that he seams to have great ‘Guantities of caretul notes, and thet ve often epende eo much time ansvering questions after the freshman class that he is late for his next class. You wotld then be highly skeptial of the troth of ‘Model 1. Rule 3: Look for Generality. Ordixarily, the more situa tions a mocel applies to, the better it is and the greater the veriety of possible implications. Finding generality involves to ordinary process of generclizing nouns ond wrbs. Eramp.e Expand “college professors” to “busy people”; expand “Yorgetting homework papers” to “forgetting anything”: expand “bringing papers” to “one bind of work” Finiing generality also involves asking repeatedly why the process we have postulated is true. We ‘ask: Ts there another model thst, if ue, woul] inclade our model a8 a9 implication That is, we look for @ mare general model tha; predicts our mode and other things ss well. Model 2, for instance ean be generalized toa large family of learning models tat ean be formulated to pretict what would happen if people leamed 10 be god neal sclentss (eee Steion 27) or exeativee (eee Chapter From such simple hevristics, altle experience, some playful ness, anc a bit of luck eome good medels, and some bad otes. In- deed its the creativity with which we spect'y bai modele that leads us :0 good ores, References Hrbort A. Sion, Models of Men (New York: Wil, 1857) ‘Artin =. Stincheambe, Constructing Socal Theerlor (New Yark: Harcourt Brace Jovanovish, 1963) Soueghime Tey, The Daxghtor of Time (Landon: Maceian, 96%) Notes Martin Destsch and Mary. vse Coline, “Interrecl Housing” in Wiliaay Poteram, ely Ameriom Social Patorna, (Garden Cay, No¥et Dootle- ay, 1882). ‘Aetualiy, the process implicit in this moée) should be david eome- what, We are nat saying that ont of eve-y 100 people there aie-70 bo are "or and who cold become eur felendt and £0 prople who are ) diferent stem go sin could coins oar enemies) ard amamanisa he fav diferens groupe: Rather, the model says Cit flatot tgone Is ecpable of becnning eltier a frienc or tnamy, depending o% ‘whether jou communicate about your slatarities r7our diferenees, “Note an altemative theory: Piople on cammissions want to hive hat porte plimanted. ‘They Ualiove (from experienas!) that extreme eports rarely ave fp emented Problems A Note Jor Instruciora. The problens in thit book are designed to stimulate thought Fer many af the prebloms, espifally those in Chapters 2 end 3, there are ao unicue corree: answers; rather, there are anly ‘hough:ful and nonthoughtful answers, or crestive/noncrestive answirs ‘The amount of vritten material i the book as delfborataly been ept terse te allow more time for thought. tp effect, we postalaty a Gresham's Law of Study: Faced with a choice reading about sownthing versus thinking about if, people will choose reiding, Reacing deives cut thinking. ‘Reading js a wel-defned tcohnolory ct which teost of us are relatively eompetint; It provides easily recognzed beochmarks of progress and fcomplesion, and -t can be accomplisted with etainty ia some easly predicted time period Reducing the necessury reading time is enly part of the solution, ‘hough We also need to mle thinkig more atractive and rewarding (One wiy to do this is the formation 2f small problem-set groups. Zack srroup nests outaide of class ‘0 discus: the problems ani ukimately tarns protien 4ste evaluat of specuations 2 -1_INSRODUCTION In Dhayter Two we asked you to coasider which of several models for the dumb football player was “bast.” Tt is « tough question. Pos- sible complications in evaluating models All large sestioxs in librar- ies. Ths is a shor: book and, as e consequence, we clearly will not do justice tc the complexity ct scientific methodelogy. As a further consequencs, we are free tc presert 2 somewhat persoral interpretation of the evalustion of models. ‘The construction and contemplation of models ace aesthetic experieices, Like other aesthetic experiences they become richer ané mere enjoysble with an appreciation of their nuances. The Gicta oz methodclogy are nothing nore mysterious thin rules of thumb zor improving the artistry of speculctiens. What we present here are some rather simple points of view about truth, beauty, ‘an¢ justice that we, and ochers, have founé helpful in heightening ‘the plezcures and usefulnes of moiel builéing in social science. 2 TRITH Some oF the pleasures of sceial scicace come rom the iieulty of iscovering models that are correct. Because chis is hard work ve devote 2 good deal cf imag:uation and effort tc disecvering how one ‘model might be more correct than another. The skills and tec! niques we use are similar to thom of a chver and thoroughly responsible detective—‘clever” because we need come imagination in inventing theories of what is hampening ard fitting ‘hem ta the facts; “thoroughly responsible” beriuse we need to fad not only fone explanation of the fsets but the best possible »xplanation among many, ‘We can start by asking how we assess the correctness of any single model. Hor fo we determine whether 1 moéel it eonsistext with reality? In order to assess trath value, we must be able %0 compar: assertions of the model with otse-vatians af the real ‘world. 2» short, ¢ good model must = testable; it must make asser- tions that can be verified ar disproved ‘An introcuctory social science class was askel to make motels that migit explain protests and riots by colleze students during the late 960s and to explen how their model might bo tested, STOP AND DO IT. Deternine what kind of answer you would give. Make up at least one medel; then deseribe how vou would test it, Following ars three poor answers that were subrritied by the stadents, Read them criticaly, Try to figure eut what nakes them oor. Answer 1 Model. “People resent being told whit to do end will ex- press this resentment if they get a chamee. College students are told kow to rua their lives by boch their parents and vollege authorities and both parents and authorities use ‘rious kinds of threats to prevent the expressioa of resert- ‘nent; the recent change to permissive regulations at college ives students a chance to express resentmert.” How to Test the Model. “Distribute a questionnaire among college stodents and ask them if they resent being told what 10 do. You could also ask parents if they use threats 10 co. ‘101 behavior.” STOP AND THINE. Can yyu see whit is wrorg with this answer? It could be either the model, the tasting pro- cedure, or both that are at fsult, although she model in Answer 1 is potentialiy tstable, the testing procedure is weal The praposed test is an attempt to examin? the mode's assumptions by interviewing the people invelved. To test a model you generally want te test the truth of iis derivations, rather than the trath of its assumptions, Assump- tions are a part of your model, ami you weuld probebly prefer them tc be true rather than false. Our reasons for sugesting that you test derivations rather chan assumptions are mostly ‘tactical. First, meny good nodels are based cn seemingly unreason- able astumptions, and we do not want you :0 reject potentially frusful ideas too rapidly. Second, testing assump:iom is likely to be urcommonly dificult because they are often asserions about 58the exclution of opeenations 54 ‘things that canno: be observed directly. Third, leapirg to test as- sumptions is likely to keep you from trying to figure out Whos Gerivations the model has Learn t exercise the model before you start resting it. Tae trick is to tes: the whole model, ineluding all ste denivations. In addition, Answer 1 has lezy testing procedures. The mis: take fs asking the people involved why sorrething hss happered ‘There is nothing wrong with this as a way of getting some ideas. Bat even if all students claim that parem's use threa:s to eontro! behavior, this coes not make the statement true Yeu must sti find owt whether what the studerts believe (or answer) is the cocrec: theory. Intarviewing ie en important technique in research, Dut the cireumstarees undar Which respondents axe geod theorists are linited, When we look for interesting derivations bo test, we note that the key variables involved iz the process are tle degree of ‘threat and people's sensitivity to the threat, So you loo} for natural Instanees in which these tio key variables vary, Some colleges have stricter regulatiors anc ha:sher penal- ties fon student infractions than other colleges. The motel say's that there will be fewer riots on the siricter campuses. Oa any given campus some sttdents are more sensitive to ctange were suceessfal. Examine the recent history of meny eolleyes and divide them invo two groups—thoze in which student atterrpte at change ‘were successful and those in which they were not. If tke model is valid, the successful group should have & lower incidencoof studert unrest Answe: 8 ‘Nodel. “The taxpeyers make great sacrifices to provide free eduestion for students. Students, ‘herefore, owe it to tthe taxpayers not to abuse this freedom.’ ow to Test the Model. “Fisd out what persensage of the sate and federal budgets goss to support higner education Tetermine if there are other things that taxparers would rather spead the money on.” STOP AND THINK. Can yeu see whet is w-onz with this answer? It could be either the medel, the testing pro- esdure, or both that are at fault Amswer 8 is weak or several counts, Fixt, itis obvious thet the test proposed is a test of the mclel’s assunptiors rather than of its predictions. A more ‘undameral difficuy is that the model has no process; it has notaing to de with oradietirg student be- havior. “tis not a statement about how people astually behave, but rather a statement about how people ought to behave, Dis not an explanation of the causes of student protest but simply « condemns ‘ion of trem, With these commerts in mia the student reformulated Answer 8 as follows: odel. “The taxpayers make great excrifices 70 provide free eincation for students. People only valus what they pay fo>. sath 55he etmtuation of epecutations 56 Sie etadente do net pay sor shelreftsaion, they are willing to disrapt it by protes:ing.” = ‘The student ako derived some prelietions to test the model: ‘Taxpayers will place a hicher valve on eduation thia the People who are getting it aad wil be more upset than students when itis disrupted ‘Those students who are working tc pay for their edueation will be mach less inclined t participate in disurbences, Raising tuition se that move studen's will be forced tc work will deo-2ase the aumber of protest ineidents.” ‘This i very 200d anwar (thoug this is otto say that it 4s necesarls correct! The mocel is well formulates, and fhe are Actions are teresting Testing the fst and secone predictors o comparative) easy. The thiré prediction will sequire some lager, ty to ten, since We muy have fo wait for “natuve” to pertooe te experiment. Theres elaborate debete in te social sciences on the que. tion of what it means ‘0 say we “ondarstand” or “explain” Hoven behavior. We do not ntend to entangle you in tne debate, You should know however. that ene whool of Hough egeste the sblee to predict wih the a>ilty t anderstanl; according to avethe school of thought, prediction pec oe is lets critical We prope a somewhat leet doctrine rule: A motel -hat has empirical con, ect erivatias is beter than a nodel thet does nettles yor save other strong reasons “or thinkng it is unsatitying When gos think you understand some typeof human Behavior Si yo Doe dictions keep turning act wrong, and vou seep having to add hove special exceptions to your model, 700 soul check to see how tach of Sour “understanding” was on self-deision $2.1 CIRCULAR MODELS ‘Think about the following model: When the Rain Dance cerenony 4s progerly performed, ind all tis participents have pure hearts, will bring rain, . STOP AND TH:NK. Is this a testable motel? Why? As ordinarily used, the model is not testable. Tt eannot be disproved. I’ the ceremony oezurs and t does rain, then the model is, ‘verified; but if the ceremony occurs and there is no rain. then the modal is also verified becaus we take the lack »f rain as evidence that come of the participants must have had evi! hearts. No matter what happens, the mode! cax account for it; it is always “correct” Docause it is elreular. For our purposes it is 2 bad model >ecause it doce not aatity the fundamertal requirement of testability. Cirevlar medals can ‘uke othar forms as well. Consider, for example, statemen's of the fillowing general form: “People pursue ‘heir own self-intereste.”” We used fuch a statement in cne of the models in Chapter Two. There is a rather elaborate literature and ‘an even more extended hisbry of cocktail-party conversations on ‘the question of whether thisstatoment is true o1 false. STOP AND THINK. What do you bebeve? How did you decide? What are the issues If you answered tha: the statament is rue, you may well have meant either of two things: 11. Whatever people do mus: be in their self-interest or taey would not do it 2 Modds that inelode a se¥-interest assumption turn ovt to make correct predictons. Bither of these mearings is perfectly sensible, but they are ‘fundamentally different. The first is a definition of an observations procedure. “t says that we cin discover something about a person's values by observirg his bekavior— he docs 3 instead of Y, it is probably because he values X more, H>wever, we can easily get inte ‘rouble if we take this frst neaning te be an assertion about humax. behavior as well, for we willbe liable -0 the circularity of inferring someones values from ther behavior, and then predicting the same behavior from: the vahes we have just dened, ‘The second meaning says that seif-irtersst assumptions are often usaful in our models: they hely produce correct predictions However, we must he carsful that she observational procedures ‘used to festa mode's predictions are carefuly specified in advance, for again iis easy to fal nto the excularity of allowing 2 loose Gefinition to confirm any possible empirical resithe evetuatios of speculations 58 ‘The possible circularities in either meaning of self-interest are, of course, no more defensible than tae beliefs about rain and ‘evl hearts, $2.2 CRITICAL EXPERIMENTS So far we heve considered the ease of testing a sixgle model, Ale thoigh such situations arise, we zenerally prefer to sompare eltera- tive models rather then accept or reject a single model. Suppose We sonsider the models produce? to explein the dumb question in Section 2.8. What do we need 40 do to examine the comparative corectness of these madels? Revall that ve hed three alternative ‘mocels, each of which was consstent wita the observation tha: a football player esked a dumb question, Model 1. Being a good athlete requires large amounts of Practice time; being smart in class requires large amounts ‘of study time. Toe amour: of free time ie 80 Bmited that we cannot beth study and practice well Model 2. Bveryone warts to feel success‘ul Achieving Success ir any on area, for examp, athietics, is enouzh to ‘make most people content. Model 2. We tead to be jeslous of sucoese ir others. When We are jealous ef someore, we attempt unconsciousy to lower bis apparertevcet in clas hy Imarpring he wo tions as “dumb.” Drning Me gees To choose among differen: modes, each of which explana the same evert, you must find some new question 20 rhc thoy five diferent answers Sieh & Greston delnees “allel ee Dent” that is an observation Sha wil lon te to theses eee Hematite reuenale modulo For exanpl, sho’ the towed seasen ie over he ht mal pred cs thal otha ieyets wih txt tie io sady and that quetons wil trove, fhe aed oot thin models predict at the havior wil be anhaneee sae rerognition presumably extends yond the fot sacar STOP AND THINK. Suppose we obtain some new date: Football season has ended and the classroom questions of football players have improved subiten‘ially. Given this new information, which of the three models is sorrect? Why? Why are these new data of everylay discoxrse, the beauty of surprise :s large'y denied uc. We are limited to the less pleasing device 0 saying sutrageou: ‘things that may surprise ochers. By using sone analrtical power, however we ean shift to the beauty of discoverzng an unenticipated ‘implicaton of an ordinary aet of assimptions. We can illustrate the reality of the advantages of even very clementery technical precision by a simple example pointed out originally by Bersrand de Joavenal. 't involes one ot the most brilliant of meder? philosophers, Jea Jacques Rousseaw His writ. {ngs heavily influenced both modern political thought and moiera Political institutions. One of his concerns was population probleme. downs 74tb evaluation of specslations 72 He formulated a simple model of population growth for eighteen:h- century Englané. His model contained three assumptions. 1. The birth rate in London is loner than te birth rate in rural England, 2 The death rate in London is higher than txe death zate in rural England. & As England industrializes, mere and more poop leave the couatryside snd move :e London STOP AND THINK. Assume thal ell three af these ss sumptions are true and will :ontinue fo be true over a long, period. Wha: will happen to the dota! pypulation of Bngland over time? Will it increase? Decrease” Wobble> Rousseau reasoned *hat since London's birth rate was lower ‘ane its death rate higher and since -ural peorle continued to move there, that the popaation of Englaad would eventually decline -o STOP AND THINE. Is Reusseau's conclusion correct? Does it follow his three assumptions? Rousseau was @ briliant phi‘osopher, aut he wes umaccuse tomed to thinking in numerical te-ms, This particuler problem, heeds namerical thinking. As de Jouvensl has abserved, Rousseau s Gerivation is falee. To explain why itis false wa neeé to éefine some uantitetive concepis. “Birth rate per thousant” can be defined se the nurber of children thet would ke born ta 1000 typieal people uring ene year. Thus if the birth rate is 25, we know that city ‘with 1000 people in it would have 88 new children daring the year, ‘and a city of 100,000 would have 8500 new childrea. “‘Jeath rate per thousand” ean ve defined as the number of deaths that wil Seetr among 100¢ typical people durng one year. E the birth rate is 26 and tae death vate is 2¢, then the Poptlation is increasing at the rate of 15 pesple per 100) (1000 at the begianing of the year — 85 new children — 20 deatas = 1015. people a: the end of the firs: year; 80 by thy end of the second; 11046 by the end of the thivd; and 2900 after about 45 years’. So Jong as the birth rate is greater than the deith rats, populatioa ‘will increase. If the differences between the two rates is arye, thea poptlat:on will giow rapid'y; if the difference is small, then popl- lation grows slowly. ‘Yow consiler Rousseau’s mode). Suppose that the birth rate in rural Englend ere 35 and the birth rate in London ware only 3 ‘Thus we satisy Housseau’s first assumption. Suppose the death rate in rura! Bngland were 20 and the death rate in Lonion wer 25 ‘This satisfies bis second assumption. Suppose that his third assamp- tion were also true, Now what happens? Th rate of populatioe srowth in rural England would be 15 por thousind (85 — 20 = 152, and in sondon it would be 5 (80 — 25). Thus Rousteeu's predie- tion is incorrect; the English population would continue to grow. I 4s true that the population of Londor would not increase as fast ss the rural population, but it weuld increase—it must do co provided ‘the birts rate exceeded the death rate. ‘The result is not surpr'sing psthaps, but it would have sur- prised Rousseau (and, in our experience, most people) Wha: ap- peared -0 be cbvivus turned out to be not only not obvious but also ‘not true, By using some analytical power w: discovered an ur- anticipated implication of an crdinary set of assumptions. ‘Thus we ald one final precep: on the production of becuty: Play to your analytical strength. Do not be afraid of twisting » ‘phenemenon around a bit 20 make i; At into an analrtical scheme ‘that can derive omne implizations for you. De not hesitate to loot ‘for phenomera that can be examinee asefully with the model and technignes you hive. The warnings you have had against letting technigxe dominste substance are all right -n their place. Here, however, they usually seriously underestimate the imgortance cf beauty :n social science. satice 73 JUSTICE Not only shotld we like to be correc! and beatiful, tut we shou also like to be just. We should like to ke able t: say that our mode's contribute to maling better, nat worse, worlds The idea is a quairt ‘and cormplicaied me. As ir the case of truth and beauty, a majcr consideration of the concept of justize is beyend the eeepe of both ‘this hodk and these authors. AN! we will attemat to do is to remind You of the importance of justice in the construstion of seeial sciencethe eosluetion of ependations 7h ‘thoor7 and to eutiine soxe possibie elementary approximations to its pursuit. Like truth and beasty, justive is an icea! rether than a stat of exbtence. We Jo not achieve it—we pursue it. In this pursuit ‘we accept some responsibility for te social myths by which we lve. Our nodels are not neutral. They establish our pere-ption of the world and they condition our atempts to act, We use therr + Gescribe others as well as ourselves. Though we need to be suitably hhumbe about the prospects for justice and ear centributions to it, ‘we do not need to be shy about trying to parsue it ‘Suppose, for example, thar a nation contains people from ‘tro diferent cultures ang that one of the ealture gous makes up & clear majority of the pogulation. Nemabers cf the minority culhire 0 nor do as well in school as members of the majerity culture, ‘Their grade averages are jower, and they are less likely to go on te cdllege and graducte schecl. Suppose some social sclertists observe ‘the situation an come up with twopossible explaratory models, Model 1. ‘The two cultures are quits different from eack other. They have different habits cf speech, diferent heme cireumstances, and differer- values. Schools ace controlled by the majority culture and correct education is defined te be consistent with the valaes and habits of the majority culture, Thus the oor schoo! performance of “he minoz students is due to judging members sf ons euiture by she standards of another. ‘Model 2. Membecs of the -ninority eaiturs ar> inferior to ‘members of the majority eclture. They do bacly in school because the'r averaze intellizence is inherently lower. ‘When the two mocels are evaluated cn the truth criterion, the results are sometimes embiguoss. 1Q tests given to members of each culture ma7 indeed show that members of the minority heve lover average stores, but the tests were desizned by the majority culture and embody its values and language habits. +t is in fact guite ciffcult to judge the comparative truh values of the tivo modela The justiee :mplications of Ge two madels are radically aif ferent, however. Government policy based on Model 1 would een. cersrate on new cechniques of schocling, bette: early ed ication, and multictitural edueation. Governmen: policy besed on Model 2 might simply e ‘hat since the minority i infarc, there i nothing v0 be doe other than creating tough simple, menial Jobe to heap “be miner employe, Tdependat ofthe tath vo ofthe vo mole they heve auite diferent Justice valuen. Ths produce dliferert action, nd the soial consequences 0: those sions do vot depenc entirely om the depres fo which the waa ure sonrect Nor it his problan solved im any simificant vay by combining oar altenstive mods ce a more correct oe. Cortertess Seok the problem ner. Ins world in which we never have complete Keowleage no egaly corre: models may have radially ferent ation intleatiens. In fhe present case Model Iie veer ‘tan Mode 2; it eas to beter behavior ‘The prolems of juice fn zodels of social scence are no ‘where more conspiecous Than they are in ov models af ndiidaa) omar behavion ‘hese modle are the mythe we toe in Geaing with ther people ani with uraalves as val Tf fhe models imple Ssttracive features to poop, we are Hikely 20 0 the sae In tr ordinary ie Consider for exanpl, the folowing model behavior sterpersozal Power ie the ability to induce other people to de something zou want In a situation in which they woule not ordinarily d> waat you want; and the ability to do what zou yourself wart x a Situation in which other peopie want yoo to do samething eve Humen buings aspice Zor power and dicect ther behavior pri- ly sovard gaining a favorable power balance with rexpect to other people, Power is secured by offering resourses, or promises of resources (for instance, support, money, respect! in exhaage Tor acquiescence ‘Such a model has some interesting features Tt is simple; it pre- ‘dicts come impertant aspects of benavior, Bat it makes a series of bredictions about human behavior that are -nattractive as « besis for dealing with other people. For example, +: predicis that: ‘Most faverable statements made in an imerpersoxs situation are probably lies. This is particu arly true of statenenta resorting ‘supportive behavioral intentions or posit ve feelings with reayect to other people. The probable trathfulnes of an iaault is mich higher thin the probable truthfulness of araise. justice 16the exahtion of ersculations 76 Insofar as we come to believe suea 2 series of assertions, we a’most sertainly make oar daily life less pleasant end ourselzes less attrac- tive as human beings, Consider similarly the fellowing assertion common to a rathor lange number of models of individual behevior: Adult human behavior is waderstendasle in fs basic forms as Stemming primarily trom experiences 0° early chithood. Such en assertion seems ersinently plausible. may even ve ‘sue. Yet, if balieved, it has at leest two curious side effects, First, ‘t leads paren:s and chiliren to kelieve thet parsnts should accept primary credit (and blane) for a child's beliefs, character, aad enecal intellectual anc moral performanse. School report cards, beco:e more important to parenral self-respect then to the child's; parents are valued in terms of thair children’s behavior. As a cox. sequence, parent-child relations eombine the worse features of juveaile blackmall (chikiren threatening t beheve mn such away ‘hat parents wil! lose xespect) and parsmal repression (parenis, determined to manage their children) Second, belief in the model seems Lkely to create a retro spective and satic bias in personal self-analysis and development. Individuals who believe the “formetive years” hypothesis seem quive Bkelr to consider the problem of personal entity to be a problem cf discovering a preexisting rea) self rather than ore of creating ‘ irteresting self. The idea of ciscovery is biased aginst adult change. A porson who believes his basic character has been formed #¢ an early age ean have little serious expeztation of being abie to nodity his style of life as an ad.lt. He ie protected by his model cf personality development from the dangeas and plesstires of con- tinuous personal change Consider fnally tie followiag assertions, whic form ¢ part of a relatively large mmber of familar models of individual ehavior ‘Things sre not whut they scam. Humar beings axe guided oy a number of uneonssious motves thet affect thet Behavior subtle waya, ‘Such assertions seem reasenable. They may ie true often enough to warrant consideration as uselul models of human be davier, What maxes them unattreetive trom the point of view af ———$———rer justice is the basic ambiguity a belief in them introduces with respect to human action. We are led to ask: What dees he reclly ‘mean* Indeed, ve are led to ask: What do I >eally meen? By intro- Gucing substantia) clements of affective ambiguity into interper- sonal sommonications, we undermine trust 2s 2 hase for éeal ng with reople. We each become a little more paranoid. Whst do : mean When Icy Tove you? {a it 2 cowention, Like "Gocd morning”? Or "How are you?” Or o wane ‘That you sara ‘With praies, or money, or exile? Or & cover For my distaste ‘Mean: to conceal it, Barely? What do: say When Trees Tove you? tis not easy to deine a simple sot of rules by wBich we make lige better through speculation. Certainly the injunction t sek usties demands more than that we merely cress our prejudices up and call them theories, It requires some subtle chovces between interpreting belavior offensively in order te change it and inter- preting behavicr positively in order to provide @ mv perspective {for ourselves. It requires a sweet appreciatin of the Lraitations of hhuman wisdom. We are protably ircapable a! meetirg the demands of Justice; but better worlds are made by elementary attempts. In partizular, we may want to ask ourselves about eny proposed model: Dehaslor by individuals, grours, oF institutions, wid our evn be- ‘havior Desome more himan ané our conmaitmert to each cher sore pro:ound? 7dhe evahaton of sposdacions 8 “5 _ THB SEARCH ‘That, io brief is something of the nature of the seareh for truth, beauty, and juste. It involves a cantinuais interslay among tie real werld, the world of aesthetics. the word of ethics, and fie moiel orld. To make a speculatien about uma behavior you begin by workixg backward. You explain an observed fact by imeginiog what Lind of provess wor, if it were tree, produee such @ fact. Then you assume your itragined process is correct and {infer seme additional facts that sould be chservable ‘Then you ‘cheak those predictions in the real world. At the same time, you assess tne justice ard the beauty of your spicwations. Al this point you usually heve to start over again Sach 2 description, of course, makes the provelure sourd ‘much more orderly than it is. The previous paragraph is, in fact, model of model building -ather thn a descr ption of i. It avoids ‘mentioning the mary complications in imagining processes and im comparing truth, beauty, and justice. As you come to appreciate he model, you wll also come to ap-reciate beth the complications ‘and the interesting idlosyncracies thet distinguish individual artists and sperifc performance within the general frame and to develop your own style in such a way that soth the eompasitien (model) and the individual performer (you) are reeogrizabe References Gratam Collier, Art and the Cruative Consciousness Englewood Gifs, Na ‘Prentioe Hal, 1979) John Ravis, A Thesry of Juesee (Cami Pres, 1971). Bugene J. Webb, Doralé 7. Campbell, Richard D. Sihwarts, end Tas Sochrety Chobérucive Measures (Skokie, I Rand MeMally, 1868) Ms Recvare University Notes 2% should be xoted that most stdents of slectior sysams would probebiy argue thet thy electoral system affects the membar oo parses a ‘east as mich as the aumber of surtiee afeas the eeseral tstans it may havi ceeurred to 7o9 thas one of the peistem, sorets of problens with respea to justice anes fram the varsty of pessble TxdOe. ‘Thue amcteur pepeimiogiste can lect tong ‘the slteenatlve models end choove the model tha: places then in « favorable light relaive te the peztoa Sahaving, se: "You ave being Gedensive” cr"You me only Pine a Fee ‘with m' This qin by an easy “vay to make your friends tnewnnreabl, bu ‘we do tot concer Xan interesting er productive ue for toddle tn social ‘lenee Problems 1. A simple childtnod theory of porsorality says that 2 peston’s basis personality and charactor are formed between the time he se Dorr ‘and age five ard that this tasie personality and character remair substantially uachangeable for the remainder of his life A simple condoning ant growth theory of >ersanality saye that. a. person’ basic persovalty and character are jormed eot:inuousl> ky Bie ails ‘experience. Hence, he may change ote: time in response 12 chansing ‘environment, aad it ie possible to change aduk personeliy and be hnavicr radically (@) Make up swo facte (that is, derive twe specific predictions) that, if they were true, would ‘end to sonfirm the childhco theory. (oi Make up two facts that, if they were true, would tand to con firm the ecnditioning end grow:h theory (e} Make up = critical fact that, i$: were tue, would simultane busty contradict one theory and support tse other. I: should be tn obsarvable fact in a ratural experiment (2) Examine “he relative ustice of the tm» theori hey are equally correct, % Tehas frequent been observed that students ming into a lecture halt vill tend tofil up the rear of the ball frat. Hare are tvo possible explanatory processes tha: predict this kind e: behavier. Proees I ‘Peope try to minimize for; having enteral at the rar of the hha, Shey sit thare rather then walk to the frant. Process IT Geneval stuten: norms sey that it ic undesimble to be deeply in volved in school work. Siting in frant would Ciaplay interest in the lass, whereas sitting in the roar disslays detachment (a Make up wo facts (that is, derive twe epeciic predictions} hat, Sf tay were true, would tend to support the model ir Process I, Then do the same thing for Pricess Il. prebloms 79