how to write a theory in an essay

• Skip to content

Davidson Writer

Academic Writing Resources for Students

Main navigation

Literary analysis: applying a theoretical lens.

A common technique for analyzing literature (by which we mean poetry, fiction, and essays) is to apply a theory developed by a scholar or other expert to the source text under scrutiny. The theory may or may not have been developed in the service literary scholarship.  One may apply, say, a Marxist theory of historical materialism to a novel, or a Freudian theory of personality development to a poem. In the hands of an analyst, another’s theory (in parts or whole) acts as a conceptual lens that when brought to the material brings certain elements into focus. The theory magnifies aspects of the text according to its special interests. The term  theory may sound rarified or abstract, but in reality a theory is simply an argument that attempts to explain something. Anytime you go to analyze literature—as you attempt to explain its meanings—you are applying theory, whether you recognize its exact dimensions or not. All analysis proceeds with certain interests, desires, and commitments (and not others) in mind. One way to define the theory—implicit or explicit—that you bring to a text is to ask yourself what assumptions (for instance, about how stories are told, about how language operates aesthetically, or about the quality of characters’ actions) guide your findings. A theory is an argument that attempts to explain something.

Let’s turn again to the insights about using theories to analyze literature provided in Joanna Wolfe’s and Laura Wilder’s  Digging into Literature: Strategies for Reading, Analysis, and Writing (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2016).

Here’s a brief example of a writer using a theoretical text as a lens for reading the primary text :

In her book,  The Second Sex , the feminist philosopher Simone de Beauvoir describes how many mothers initially feel indifferent toward and estranged from their new infants, asserting that though “the woman would like to feel that the new baby is surely hers as is her own hand,. . . she does not recognize him because. . .she has experienced her pregnancy without him: she has no past in common with this little stranger” (507). Sylvia Plath’s “Morning Song” exemplifies the indifference and estrangement that de Beauvoir describes. However, where de Beauvoir asserts that “a whole complex of economical and sentimental considerations makes the baby seem either a hindrance or a jewel” (510), Plath’s poem illustrates how a child can simultaneously be both hindrance and jewel. Ultimately, “Morning Song” shows us how new mothers can overcome the conflicting emotions de Beauvoir describes.

Daniel DiGiacomo.  From Mourning Song to “Morning Song”: The Maturation of a Maternal Bond.

Notice that in this brief passage, the writer fairly represents de Beauvoir’s theory about maternal feelings, then goes on to apply a portion of that theory to Plath’s poem, a focusing move that establishes the writer’s special interest in an aspect of Plath’s text. In this case, the application yields new insight about the non-universality of de Beauvoir’s theory, which Plath’s poem troubles.  The theory magnifies a portion of the primary text, and its application puts pressure on the soundness of the theory.

Applying a Theoretical Lens: W.E.B. Du Bois Applied to Langston Hughes

Experienced literary critics are familiar with a wide range of theoretical texts they can use to interpret a primary text. As a less experienced student, your instructors will likely suggest pairings of theoretical and primary texts.  We would like you to consider the writerly workings of the theory-primary text application by examining a student’s paper entitled “Double-consciousness in ‘Theme for English B,” an essay which uses W.E.B. Du Bois’s theory (of  double-consciousness ) to elucidate and interpret Langston Hughes’s poem (“Theme for English B”). W.E.B. Du Bois (1868-1963) was an American sociologist, civil rights activist, author, and editor. Langston Hughes (1902-1967) was an American poet, activist, editor, and guiding member of the group of artists now known as the Harlem Renaissance.

But before you can make sense of that student’s essay, we ask that you read both a synopsis of the  theoretical text   and the   primary text .

Primary Text

The instructor said,

Go home and write  a page tonight.

And let that page come out of you—

Then, it will be true.

I wonder if it’s that simple?

I am a twenty-two, colored, born in Winston-Salem.

I went to school there, then Durham, then here

to this college on the hill above Harlem,

I am the only colored student in my class.

The steps from the hill lead down into Harlem through a park, then I cross St. Nicholas,

Eighth Avenue, Seventh, and I come to the Y,

the Harlem Branch Y, where I take the elevator

up to my room, site down, and write this page:

It’s not easy to know what is true for you or me

at twenty-two, my age. But I guess I’m what

I feel and see and hear, Harlem, I hear you:

hear you, hear me—we two—you, me, talk on this page.

(I hear New York, too.) Me—who?

Well, I like to eat, sleep, drink, and be in love.

I like to work, read, learn, and understand life.

I like a pipe for a Christmas present,

or records—Bessie, bop, or Bach.

I guess being colored doesn’t make me not like

the same things other folks like who are other races.

So will my page be colored that I write?

Being me, it will not be white.

But it will be  a part of you, instructor.

You are white—

yet a part of me, as I am a part of you.

That’s American.

Sometimes perhaps you don’t want to be a part of me.

Nor do I often want to be a part of you.

But we are, that’s true!

As I learn from you,

I guess you learn from me—

although you’re older—and white—

and somewhat more free.

Theoretical Text 

W.E.B. Du Bois

Of Our Spiritual Strivings

O water, voice of my heart, crying in the sand,

All night long crying with a mournful cry,

As I lie and listen, and cannot understand

The voice of my heart in my side or the voice of the sea.

O water, crying for rest, is it I, is it I?

All night long the water is crying to me.

Unresting water, there shall never be rest

Till the last moon drop and the last tide fall,

And the fire of the end begin to burn in the west;

And the heart shall be weary and wonder and cry like the sea,

All life long crying without avail

As the water all nigh long is crying to me.

                    —Arthur Symons

Between me and the other world there is an unasked question: unasked by some through feelings of delicacy; by others through the difficulty of rightly framing it. All, nevertheless, flutter round it. They approach me in a half-hesitant sort of way, eye me curiously or compassionately, and then, instead of saying directly, How does it feel to be a problem? they say, I know an excellent colored man in my town; or I fought at Mechanicsville; or Do not these Southern outrages make your blood boil? At these I smile, or am interested, or reduce the boiling to a simmer, as the occasion may require. To the real question, How does it feel to be a problem? I answer seldom a word.

And yet, being a problem is a strange experience—peculiar even for one who has never been anything else, save perhaps in babyhood and in Europe. It is in the early days of rollicking boyhood that the revelation first bursts upon one, all in a day, as it were. I remember well when the shadow swept across me. I was a little thing, away up in the hills of New England, where the dark Housatonic winds between Hoosac and Taghkanic to the sea. In a wee wooden schoolhouse, something put it into the boys’ and girls’ heads to buy gorgeous visiting-cards—ten cents a package—and exchange. The exchange was merry, till one girl, a tall newcomer, refused my card—refused it peremptorily, with a glance. Then it dawned upon me with a certain sadness that I was different from the others; or, like, mayhap, in heart and life and longing, but shut out from their world as by a vast veil. I had thereafter no desire to tear down that veil, to creep through; I held all beyond it in common contempt, and lived above it in a region of blue sky and great wandering shadows. That sky was bluest when I could beat my mates at examination time, or beat them at a footrace, or even beat their stringy heads. Alas, with the hears all this fine contempt began to fade; for the worlds I long for, and all their dazzling opportunities, were theirs, not mine. But they should not keep these prizes, I said; some, all, I would wrest from them. Just how I would do it I could never decide: by reading law, by healing the sick, by telling the wonderful tales that swam in my head—some way. With other black boys the strife was not so fiercely sunny: their youth shrunk into tasteless sycophancy, or into silent hatred of the pale world about them and mocking distrust of everything white, or wasted itself in a bitter cry, Why did God make me an outcast and a stranger in mine own house? The shades of the prison-house closed round about us all: walls strait and stubborn to the whitest, but relentlessly narrow, tall, and unscalable to sons of night who must plod darkly on in resignation, or beat unavailing palms against the stone, or steadily, half hopelessly, watch the streak of blue above.

After the Egyptian and Indian, the Greek and Roman, the Teuton and Mongolian, the Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and gifted with second-sight in this American world, a world which yields him no true self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his tw0-ness, an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strengths alone keeps it from being torn asunder.

The history of the American Negro is the history of this strife, this longing to attain self-conscious manhood, to merge his double self into a better and truer self. In this merging he wishes neither of the older selves to be lost. He would not Africanize America, for America has too much to teach the world and Africa. He would not bleach his Negro soul in a flood of white Americanism, for he knows that Negro blood has a message for the world. He simply wishes to make it possible for a man to be both a Negro and an American, without being cursed and spit upon by his fellows, without having the doors of Opportunity closed roughly in his face.

This, then, is the end of his striving: To be a coworker in the kingdom of culture, to escape both death and isolation, to husband and use his best powers and his latent genius. These powers of body and mind have in the past been strangely wasted, dispersed, or forgotten. The shadow of a might Negro past flits through the tale of Ethiopia the Shadowy and of Egypt the Sphinx. Throughout history, the powers of single black men flash here and there like falling stars, and die sometimes before the world has rightly gauged their brightness. Here in America, in the few days since Emancipation, the black man’s turning hither and thither in hesitant and doubtful striving has often made his very strength to loos effectiveness, to seem like absence of power, like weakness.  And yet it is not weakness—it is the contradiction of double aims. The double-aimed struggle of the black artisan—on the one hand to escape white contempt for a nation of mere hewers of wood and drawers of water, and on the other hand to plough and nail and dig for a poverty-stricken horde—could only result in making him a poor craftsman, for he had but half a heart either cause. By the poverty and ignorance of his people, the Negro minister or doctor was tempted toward quackery and demagogy; and by the criticism of the other world, toward ideals that made him ashamed of his lowly tasks. The would-be black savant was confronted by the paradox that the knowledge his people needed was a twice-told tale to his white neighbors, while the knowledge which would teach the white world was Greek to his own flesh and blood. The innate love of harmony and beauty that set the ruder souls of his people a-dancing and a-singing raised but confusion and doubt in the soul of the black artist; for the beauty revealed to him was the soul-beauty of a race which his larger audience despised, and he could not articulate the message of another people. This waste of double aims, this seeking to satisfy two unreconciled ideals, has wrought sad havoc with the courage and faith and deeds of ten thousand thousand people—has sent them often wooing false gods and invoking false means of salvation, and at times has even seemed about to make them ashamed of themselves.

Away back in the days of bondage they thought to see in one divine event the end of all doubt and disappointment; few men ever worshipped Freedom with half such unquestioning faither as did the American Negro for two centuries. To him, so far as he thought and dreamed, slavery was indeed the sum of all villainies, the cause of all sorrow, the root of all prejudice; Emancipation was the key to a promised land of sweeter beauty than ever stretched before the eyes of wearied Israelites. In song and exhortation swelled one refrain—Liberty; in his tears and curses the God he implored had Freedom in his right hand. At last it came—suddenly, fearfully, like a dream. With one wild carnival of blood and passion came the message in his own plaintive cadences:—

“Shout, O children!

Shout, you’re free!

For God has bought your liberty!”

Years have passed away since then—ten, twenty, forty; forty years of national life, forty years of renewal and development, and yet the swarthy scepter sits in its accustomed seat at the Nation’s feast. In vain do we cry to this our vastest social problem:—

“Take any shape but that, and my firm nerves

Shall never tremble!”

The Nation has not yet found peace from its since; the freedman has not yet found in freedom his promised land. Whatever of good may have come in these years of change, the shadow of a deep disappointment rests upon the Negro people—a disappointment all the more bitter because the unattained ideal was unbounded save by the simple ignorance of a lowly people.

The first decade was merely a prolongation of the vain search for freedom, the boon that seemed ever barely to elude their grasp—like a tantalizing will-o-the-wisp, maddening and misleading the headless host. The holocaust of war, the terrors of the Ku Klux Klan, the lies of carpetbaggers, the disorganization of industry, and the contradictory advice of friends and foes, left the bewildered serf with no new watchword beyond the old cry for freedom. As the time flew, however, he began to grasp a new idea. The ideal of liberty demanded for its attainment powerful means, and these the Fifteenth Amendment gave him. The ballot, which before he had looked upon as a visible sign of freedom, he now regarded as the chief means of gaining and perfecting the liberty with which war had partially endowed him. And why not? Had not votes made war and emancipated millions? Had not votes enfranchised the freedmen? Was anything impossible to a power that had done all this? A million black men started with renewed zeal to vote themselves into the kingdom. So the decade flew away, the revolution of 1876 came, and left the half-free serf weary, wondering, but still inspired. Slowly but steadily, in the following years, a new vision began gradually to replace the dream of political power—a powerful movement, the rise of another ideal to guide the unguided, another pillar of fire by night after a clouded day. It was the ideal of “book-learning”: the curiosity, born of compulsory ignorance, to know and test the power of the cabalistic letters of the white man, the longing to know. Here at last seemed to have been discovered the mountain path to Canaan; longer than the highway to Emancipation and law, steep and rugged, but straight, leading to heights high enough to overlook life.

Up the new path the advance guard toiled, slowly, heavily, doggedly; only those who have watched and guided the faltering feet, the misty minds, the dull understandings, of the dark pupils of these schools know how faithfully, how piteously, this people strove to learn. It was weary work. The cold statistician wrote down the inches of progress here and there, noted also where here and there a foot had slipped or someone fallen. To the tired climbers, the horizon was ever dark, the mists were often cold, the Canaan was always dim and far away. If, however, the vistas disclosed as yet no goal, no resting place, little but flattery and criticism, the journey at least gave leisure for reflection and self-examination; it changed the child of Emancipation to the youth with dawning self-consciousness, self-realization, self-respect. In those somber forests of his striving his own soul rose before him, and he saw himself—darkly as through a veil; and yet he saw in himself some faint revelation of his power, of his mission. He began to have a dim feeling that, to attain his place in the world, he must be himself, and not another. For the first time he sought to analyze the burden he bore upon his back, that deadweight of social degradation partially masked behind a half-named Negro problem. He felt his poverty; without a cent, without a home, without land, tools, or savings, he had entered into competition with rich, landed, skilled neighbors. To be a poor man is hard, but to be a poor race in a land of dollars is the very bottom of hardships. He felt the weight of his ignorance,—not simply of letters, but of life, of business, of the humanities; the accumulated sloth and shirking and awkwardness of decades and centuries shackled his hands and feet. Nor was his burden all poverty and ignorance. The red stain of bastardy, which two centuries of systematic legal defilement of Negro women had stamped upon his race, meant not only the loss of ancient African chastity, but also the hereditary weight of a mass of corruption from white adulterers, threatening almost the obliteration of the Negro home.

A people thus handicapped ought not to be asked to race with the world, but rather allowed to give all its time and thought to its own social problems. But alas! while sociologists gleefully count his bastards and prostitutes, the very soul of the toiling, sweating black man is darkened by the shadow of a vast despair. Men call the shadow prejudice, and learnedly explain it as the natural defense of culture against barbarism, learning against ignorance, purity against crime, the “higher” against the lower races. To which the Negro cries Amen! and swears that to such much of this strange prejudice as is founded on just homage to civilization, culture, righteousness, and progress, he humbly bows and meekly does obeisance. But before that nameless prejudice that leaps beyond all this he stands helpless, dismayed, and well-nigh speechless; before that personal disrespect and mockery, the ridicule and systematic humiliation, the distortion of fact and wanton license of fancy, the cynical ignoring of the better and the boisterous welcoming of the worse, the all-pervading desire to inculcate disdain for everything b lack, from Toussaint to the devil—before this there rises a sickening despair that would disarm and discourage any nation save the black host to whom “discouragement” is an unwritten word.

But the facing of so vast a prejudice could not but bring the inevitable self-questioning, self-disparagement, and lowering of ideals which ever accompany repression and breed in an atmosphere of contempt and hate. Whisperings and portents came borne upon the four winds: Lo! we are diseased and dying, cried the dark hosts; we cannot write, our voting is vain; what we need of education, since we must always cook and serve? And the Nation echoed and enforced this self-criticism, saying: Be content to be servants, and nothing more; what need of higher culture for half-men? Away with the black man’s ballot, by force or fraud—and behold the suicide or a race! Nevertheless, out of the evil came something of good—the more careful adjustment of education to real life, the clearer perception of the Negroes’ social responsibilities, and the sobering realization of the meaning of progress.

So dawned the time of Sturm und Drang: storm and stress today rocks out little boat on the mad waters of the world-sea; there is within and without the sound of conflict, the burning of body and rending of soul; inspiration strives without doubt, and faith with vain questionings. The bright ideals of the past—physical freedom, political power, the training of brains and the training of hands—all these in turn have waxed and waned, until even the last grows dim and overcast. Are they all wrong—all false? No, not that, but each alone was oversimple and incomplete—the dreams of a credulous race-childhood, or the fond imaginings of the other world which does not know and does not want to know our power. To be really true, all these ideals must be melted and welded into one. The training of the schools we need today more than ever—the training of deft hands, quick eyes and ears, and above all the broader, deeper, higher culture of gifted minds and pure hearts. The power of the ballot we need in sheer self-defense—else what shall save us from a second slavery? Freedom, too, the long-sought, we still seek—the freedom of life and limb, the freedom to work and think, the freedom to love and aspire. Work, culture, liberty—all these we need, not singly but together, not successively but together, each growing and aiding each, and all striving toward that vaster ideal that swims before the Negro people, the ideal of human brotherhood, gamed through the unifying ideal of Race; the idea of fostering and developing the traits and talents of the Negro, not in opposition to or contempt for other race, but rather in large conformity to the greater ideals of the American Republic, in order that someday on American soil two world races may give each to each those characteristics both so sadly lack. We the darker ones come even now not altogether empty-handed: there are today no truer exponents of the pure human spirit of the Declaration of Independence than the American Negroes; there is not true American music but the wild sweet melodies of the Negro slave; the American fairy tales and folklore are Indian and African; and, all in all, we black men seem the sole oasis of simple faith and reverence in a dusty desert of dollars and smartness. Will American be poorer if she replace her brutal dyspeptic blundering with light-hearted but determined Negro humility? of her coarse and cruel wit with loving jovial good-humor? or her vulgar music with the soul of the Sorrow Songs?

Merely a concrete test of the underlying principles of the great republic is the Negro Problem, and the spiritual striving of the freedmen’s sons is the travail of souls whose burden is almost beyond the measure of their strength, but who bear it in the name of an historic race, in the name of this the land of their fathers’ fathers, and in the name of human opportunity.

Using a Theoretical Lens to Write Persuasively

Applying a theoretical lens to poetry, fiction, plays, or essays is a standard academic move, but theories are also frequently applied to real-world cases, hypothetical cases, and other non-fiction texts in disciplines such as Philosophy, Sociology, Education, Anthropology, History, or Political Science. Sometimes, the theoretical lens analysis is called a  reading , as in a “Kantian reading of an ethical dilemma,” or a “Marxist reading of an historical episode.” At other times, the application of a theory is known as an  approach , as in a “Platonic approach to the question of beauty.”

The basic writerly moves to using a theoretical lens include:

• name and cite the theoretical text and accurately summarize this text’s argument. Usually this short summary appears in one or two paragraphs at the beginning of the essay. You will want to be sure your summary includes the key concepts you use in your paper to analyze the primary literary text.
• use the surface/depth strategy to show how deeper meanings in the primary text can be explained by concepts from the theoretical text.  You might think about this as creating a “match argument” between the primary and theoretical text (or case under consideration). Take important points made in the theoretical argument and match them to particular events or descriptions in the primary text. For instance, you could argue Langston Hughes’s line  So will my page be colored as I write? (27) matches Du Bois’s argument that the veil prevents Whites from seeing Black’s individuality. Such a match argument can form an organizing structure for the essay as you develop whole paragraphs to support different points of connection between the theoretical and primary texts. You may be able to devote an entire paragraph to the claim that Du Bois’s concept of “the veil” can help us understand Hughes’s description of the challenges his speaker faces in asking his instructor to see him on his own terms.
• support your surface/depth claims linking the primary and theoretical texts with textual evidence from the primary text . If you claim that a particular passage exemplifies a particular theory, you need to provide evidence in the form of quotations or paraphrases to support this interpretation. This evidence will most certainly need to be provided from the primary text you are analyzing but perhaps also occasionally from the theoretical text, too, especially if you connect the primary text to a small detail in the theoretical text or if the wording of the theoreticl text helps you explain something in the primary text. Use the patterns strategy to provide multiple examples from the primary text supporting your claims that it matches elements of the theoretical text.
• reveal something complex and unexpected about the primary text. The goal of the theoretical lens strategy—like all strategies of literary analysis—should be to show that the text you are analyzing is complex and can be understood on multiple levels.
• challenge, extend, or reevaluate the theoretical text (for more sophisticated analyses).  The most sophisticated uses of the theoretical lens strategy not only help you better understand the primary text but also help you better understand—and reveal complexities in—the theoretical text. When you first start applying this strategy, it may be sufficient to argue how the theoretical text helps you understand the primary text, but as you advance, you should attempt the second part of this strategy and use the primary text to extend or challenge the theoretical argument. Such arguments may serve as starting points for you to contribute to literary (or philosophical, or sociological, or historical) theory as a theorist yourself. These arguments are often made in the concluding paragraphs of analyses using the theoretical lens strategy.

Common Words and Phrases Associated with Theoretical Lens

A Sample Student Essay

Title: Double-consciousness in “Theme for English B”

Paragraph 1

The post-slavery history of African-Americans in the United States has been one of struggle for recognition. This struggle continued through the civil rights movement in the 1970s and ’80s. W.E.B. Du Bois, one of the most influential African-American leaders of the early twentieth century, described the complicated effects racism had on African-American selfhood. In his treatise  The Souls of Black Folk , Du Bois introduces the term “double-consciousness” to describe African-Americans’s struggle for self-recognition. Double-consciousness is the sense of “always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others” (8). It means that an African-American “[e]ver feels his two-ness—an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body” (8). According to Du Bois, double-consciousness means that African-Americas are always judging themselves through a veil of racism, experiencing how others judge and define them rather than how they might define and express themselves.

Paragraph 2

Langston Hughes’s poem “Theme for English B,” written nearly fifty years after Du Bois’s essay, depicts one African-American’s continued struggle with double-consciousness. However, where Du Bois sees double-consciousness as a painful condition he hopes will one day disappear, Hughes seems to have a more positive view, suggesting that mainstream Americans should also have an opportunity to experience this condition. Instead of eradicating double-consciousness, Hughes seeks to universalize it. His poem suggests that true equality will be possible when all cultures are able to experience and appreciate double-consciousness.

Paragraph 3

We see the poem’s speaker struggling with double-consciousness when he expresses difficulty articulating what is “true” for himself. Hughes writes:

It’s not easy to know what is true for you and me

I feel and see and hear. Harlem, I hear you:

(I hear New York, too.) Me—who? (16-20)

In this passage, which concludes with a question about who he is, the speaker expresses a divided self. At first, he seems to identify with Harlem, an African-American neighborhood in New York, where he is currently sitting and writing. However, this identification becomes troubled by his acknowledgment that Harlem does not completely define him. When the speaker writes “hear you, hear me—we two” (19), he suggests that “you” (referring to Harlem) and “me” (referring to himself) are intimately related by not identical. They are two voices that, while both present in his poem, still “talk” (19) to one another. The fact that these voices converse, rather than speak as one, indicates they are not completely merged.

Paragraph 4

This sense of a divided self is further reinforced by the claim “(I hear New York, too.)” (20). This aside is interesting because it establishes Harlem as both separate from and connected to the larger city. This division reflects what Du Bois calls the “two-ness [of being] an Amercan [and] a Negro” (8). By placing New York in parentheses, the speaker may be suggesting that the American part of himself represented by New York plays a weaker role in his identity than the African-American self represented by Harlem. Like Du Bois, the speaker in “Theme for English B” experiences inner conflict when he tries to reconcile the different parts of himself.

Paragraph 5

We further see evidence of the speaker’s conflict when he writes that he likes “Bessie, bop, or Bach” (24). “Bessie” refrs to the popular blues singer Bessie Smith, an African-American woman who sang a very African-American style of music. At the other end of the spectrum is “Bach,” which refers to the classical European composer J.S. Bach and represents a traditionally White form of music. In the middle is “bop,” which refers to “bebop,” a form of jazz made popular in the 1940s that inspired a particular form of dance most practiced by White teenagers at the time. In saying that he likes all of these forms of music, the speaker indicates that he is a mix of both African and European identities—like Du Bois, he feels both traditional White and traditional African-American culture calling him.

Paragraph 6

The “page” that the poem’s speak has been asked to write likewise reflects the two-ness of being African-American. An essay can be thought of as black ink on white paper, which in the context of the poem represents Black identity articulated against a White background. The speaker refers to this conflict of identities when he writes, “So will my page be colored that I write? / Being me, it will not be white” (27-28). These lines suggest that the speaker is worried that his instructor will only see him as a representative Black student. It shows how the speaker is caught in a double bind: when the teacher asks the class to write something “true” (5), he will expect this particular student (who in the first stanza tells us he is the only Black student in the class) to write in a way consistent with his obvious Black heritage. But the student is aware that his White teacher doesn’t really know what it means to be Black. Thus, if he writes in a way that fulfills his instructor’s expectations, he will write a page that seems to a White teacher to be an authentic depiction of what it means to be Black—in other words, a White representation of Blackness. This dilemma illuminates what Du Bois refers to as “always looking at one’s self thorugh the eyes of others” (8). Because the speaker in the poem is so aware of what his instructor (and possibly the other students in the class) already thinks of him, he is having difficulty articulating just who he really is.

Paragraph 7

At the end of the poem, however, instead of calling for the eradication of double-consciousness as Du Bois does when he longs for the day that African-Americans will be able to “merge his double-self into a better and truer self” (9), Hughes seems to suggest that instead his instructor needs to feel the double-identity that he feels so strongly. Thus, he writes “You are white— / yet a part of me, as I am a part of you” (31-32) and “As I learn from you, / I guess you learn from me—” (36-37). These lines indicate that the White instructor needs to accept, African-American identity as part of his own culture, just as the speaker has needed to see both parts of his identity calling him. This ability to feel and be multiple perspectives, cultures, and backgrounds at once is labeled “American” in the second stanza. Hughes seems to be suggesting that even though the”two-ness” he feels is often difficult and painful, it needs to be seen as central to American—and not just African-American—identity. When he states at the end of the poem, “I guess you learn from me” (38), he is turning the tables on the teacher, and on Whites in general, by suggesting that they have as much to learn from exploring Black culture as Blacks have to learn by studying classic White culture.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation

What is a Theoretical Framework? | A Step-by-Step Guide

Published on 14 February 2020 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 10 October 2022.

A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work.

Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research, showing that your work is grounded in established ideas.

In other words, your theoretical framework justifies and contextualises your later research, and it’s a crucial first step for your research paper , thesis, or dissertation . A well-rounded theoretical framework sets you up for success later on in your research and writing process.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why do you need a theoretical framework, how to write a theoretical framework, structuring your theoretical framework, example of a theoretical framework, frequently asked questions about theoretical frameworks.

Before you start your own research, it’s crucial to familiarise yourself with the theories and models that other researchers have already developed. Your theoretical framework is your opportunity to present and explain what you’ve learned, situated within your future research topic.

There’s a good chance that many different theories about your topic already exist, especially if the topic is broad. In your theoretical framework, you will evaluate, compare, and select the most relevant ones.

By “framing” your research within a clearly defined field, you make the reader aware of the assumptions that inform your approach, showing the rationale behind your choices for later sections, like methodology and discussion . This part of your dissertation lays the foundations that will support your analysis, helping you interpret your results and make broader generalisations .

• In literature , a scholar using postmodernist literary theory would analyse The Great Gatsby differently than a scholar using Marxist literary theory.
• In psychology , a behaviourist approach to depression would involve different research methods and assumptions than a psychoanalytic approach.
• In economics , wealth inequality would be explained and interpreted differently based on a classical economics approach than based on a Keynesian economics one.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

To create your own theoretical framework, you can follow these three steps:

• Identifying your key concepts
• Evaluating and explaining relevant theories
• Showing how your research fits into existing research

1. Identify your key concepts

The first step is to pick out the key terms from your problem statement and research questions . Concepts often have multiple definitions, so your theoretical framework should also clearly define what you mean by each term.

To investigate this problem, you have identified and plan to focus 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 company X’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

2. Evaluate and explain relevant theories

By conducting a thorough literature review , you can determine how other researchers have defined these key concepts and drawn connections between them. As you write your theoretical framework, your aim is to compare and critically evaluate the approaches that different authors have taken.

After discussing different models and theories, you can establish the definitions that best fit your research and justify why. You can even combine theories from different fields to build your own unique framework if this better suits your topic.

Make sure to at least briefly mention each of the most important theories related to your key concepts. If there is a well-established theory that you don’t want to apply to your own research, explain why it isn’t suitable for your purposes.

3. Show how your research fits into existing research

Apart from summarising and discussing existing theories, your theoretical framework should show how your project will make use of these ideas and take them a step further.

You might aim to do one or more of the following:

• Test whether a theory holds in a specific, previously unexamined context
• Use an existing theory as a basis for interpreting your results
• Critique or challenge a theory
• Combine different theories in a new or unique way

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation. As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

There are no fixed rules for structuring your theoretical framework, but it’s best to double-check with your department or institution to make sure they don’t have any formatting guidelines. The most important thing is to create a clear, logical structure. There are a few ways to do this:

• Draw on your research questions, structuring each section around a question or key concept
• Organise by theory cluster
• Organise by date

As in all other parts of your research paper , thesis, or dissertation , make sure to properly cite your sources to avoid plagiarism .

To get a sense of what this part of your thesis or dissertation might look like, take a look at our full example .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, October 10). What is a Theoretical Framework? | A Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved 6 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/the-theoretical-framework/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a literature review | guide, template, & examples, how to write a results section | tips & examples, how to write a discussion section | tips & examples.

Inframethodology

A weblog devoted to the underlying craft of research, how to write the theory section.

[See also: How to write a research project . How to write the background , methods , analysis and discussion sections. How to write the introduction and conclusion . How to review the literature and how to structure a research paper . How to finish on time and how to reference properly . Part of the Craft of Research series. Full program here .]

Your reader already understands the basic concepts of your theory. So you don’t have to teach your theory to your reader; you simply have to explain how you are applying it to your particular object. In an important sense, your theory section constructs the objectivity of your object, it establishes a space of possible arrangements of things in the world, it “frames” your observations within this space. It is true that it identifies your “point of view” on your empirical material but it is no less true that this point of view is easily available to your readers. Their own training (in your discipline) allows them to easily step into it and see the world through your eyes. You share a perspective on the world and we call this perspective your “theory”.

In this talk I tried to bring together Ezra Zuckerman’s suggestion that you should strive to make your theory “compelling” with Steve Fuller’s understanding of theory as “presumption”. I lose track of my argument a bit near the end, when I accidently say (at 44:52) that you don’t have to help your reader to believe that your theoretical claims are true because the reader already believes them. It would be more precise to say that the reader presumes that they are true “for the sake of argument”, that is, they are willing to proceed (to your analysis) as though the theory is true. That’s why you have to make sure that your theoretical model is compelling — we should be in a certain sense “forced” to see the world as the theory suggests. By reminding ourselves that we no more believe in our theories than we believe that the accused in a trial is innocent (we may, indeed, believe the opposite!) we naturally check our biases — our “compulsion” to believe certain things without thinking carefully about them. Theoretical presumptions are not hypotheses to be tested (that comes later); they are frames that remain in place while the testing going on and are then removed when the testing is complete. Presumptions are “procedural” checks on our compulsions.

This ties in nicely with my other ideas about theory, such that a theory is a “system of expectations” or what Bourdieu calls a “program of perception”. Our theories lead us to expect certain things of our objects and therefore “program” us (like computers) to see the world in particular ways, noticing some things and ignoring others. When writing our theory section we’re being upfront about our programming. As I say in the talk, theories are ways of marshalling our passing “thoughts” about “things” in the more logical space of “concepts” and “objects” . Without theories, things are just lying around wherever and however they like. Our theories provide a “frame” in which to “model” their behavior, helping us to distinguish “normal” from “deviant” data points (yes, I’m trying to pun on statistical language there). This also become the frame in which you set up the hypotheses you will test. As Ezra reminds us, it is your “null” that is (presumably!) compelling. Your hypotheses (which, if true, will “reject the null”) are even more interesting.

There are softer ways about this. You can use your theory simply to shape your reader’s curiosity, or you can even leave the explication of your model until the end, after you have “grounded” it inductively. In such cases, I would strongly recommend writing a literature review that anticipates the conceptual resources you end up using, and putting it before your methods description. These are issues that we’ll touch on again next week, when we talk about method, and then again when we talk about how to structure the whole project.

Here are some more resources on the subject:

“Theory as Expectation”

“Theories, Concepts, and Models”

“Theory, Method, Style”

“Reading, Talking, Seeing”

“Consensus, Controversy, Contribution”

“Never Write Literature Reviews”

Here’s what I say about it in the “How to Structure” lecture:

And here is the video from 2022.

Glasgow School  for Business and Society

The Glasgow School for Business and Society integrates the areas of business, law and social sciences to ensure that they are well placed to meet the needs of business and society. The School has an international outlook and is committed to developing partnerships across the world.

Writing critically about theory or models

Critical reading about a theory or model.

A theory is a system of ideas that tries to explain something. It is generally based on general principles independent of the phenomenon (thing) being explained. Theory also refers to a body of ideas or a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based eg a theory of education, or a theory of marketing.

A model is a graphical, mathematical (symbolic), physical, or verbal representation or simplified version of a concept, phenomenon, relationship, structure, system, or an aspect of the real world. It is used to help understand complex real-world phenomena. When reading about a theory or a model, find out:

• a. What issue does it seek to explain?
• b. Who developed the theory/model?
• c. What are its origins? Did it develop out of another model or theory?
• d. How it has changed/evolved over time?
• e. What are the principles on which it is based?
• a. What new explanations/insights does it offer?
• b. What contribution does it make to understanding of issue?
• a. What are its limitations and/or gaps?
• What other theory or model may be important in understanding this issue? Is this theory or model more, less or equally important in improving understanding of issue?
• a. In what way is this theory or model relevant to my assignment?
• b. What are the implications of this theory or model for practice?
• c. How can it be applied usefully to enhance practice?

Click on this link for an  example of critical discussion of theory

Reading, understanding and using theory

• Why do we read theory?
• Understanding theory
• When and how to read theory
• Using theory in your assignments
• Using theory in research
• References and further reading

Writing about theory

If possible, try to engage with relevant theory in some way whilst writing assignments. If you can at least show your awareness of major theorists, concepts or arguments – even in passing – it will demonstrate that you have an understanding of the wider academic context of the subject that you are writing about.

It might be that you are only able to describe a particular theory and not say much else. If it is very complicated, and you’re not confident with doing any more than this, then it’s still better to acknowledge the theory or theorist than to leave this out completely. However, if you are able to raise any points that evaluate or critique the theory then this will always impress your marker.

Critiquing or evaluating theory

It can feel very daunting to critique theory, but one way to do this is to think about how theory can reduce or constrict the ways we approach a topic, as well as helping us to see other points of view. Remember that theory works like a lens: when we use it to ‘look’ at a certain topic, it will bring particular elements of it into focus. However, by the same logic, individual theoretical perspectives can make us quite blinkered; it might be that we miss other perspectives that are important, or are forced to looks at things from a certain angle that prevents us from seeing the big picture.

This doesn’t mean that you can just straightforwardly complain that ‘Feminism is only interested in women’s perspectives’, for instance. But if you think that a Feminist theoretical perspective, when applied to your subject, is reductive or leads us to ignore other important points, then that might be a valid critique.

Comparing and contrasting theory

Another way to critically evaluate theoretical arguments or approaches is to put them side by side. It’s very difficult to critique ideas in isolation, but can sometimes be easier if you compare or contrast people’s perspectives on a subject. Thinking about the relative strengths or weaknesses of different arguments or explanations can also help your writing to be less descriptive. Consider the following two examples:

If you can acknowledge or describe a theory in your writing then that is better than nothing! But if you can, try to critique or evaluate it. Remember that no theoretical approach is perfect - it will give you one perspective on your topic. Therefore, there will likely be shortcomings with it. It might be easier for you to identify these if you compare different theories. Is one approach more rounded or complete than another? Does one provide a more suitable way in for you to consider your subject?

• << Previous: When and how to read theory
• Next: Using theory in research >>
• Last Updated: Apr 5, 2023 4:26 PM
• URL: https://libguides.bham.ac.uk/asc/theory

• LEARNING SKILLS
• Study Skills

What is Theory?

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Learning Skills:

• A - Z List of Learning Skills
• What is Learning?
• Learning Approaches
• Learning Styles
• 8 Types of Learning Styles
• Understanding Your Preferences to Aid Learning
• Lifelong Learning
• Decisions to Make Before Applying to University
• Top Tips for Surviving Student Life
• Living Online: Education and Learning
• 8 Ways to Embrace Technology-Based Learning Approaches
• Critical Thinking Skills
• Critical Thinking and Fake News
• Understanding and Addressing Conspiracy Theories
• Critical Analysis
• Top Tips for Study
• Staying Motivated When Studying
• Student Budgeting and Economic Skills
• Getting Organised for Study
• Finding Time to Study
• Sources of Information
• Assessing Internet Information
• Using Apps to Support Study
• Styles of Writing
• Effective Reading
• Critical Reading
• Note-Taking from Reading
• Note-Taking for Verbal Exchanges
• Planning an Essay
• How to Write an Essay
• The Do’s and Don’ts of Essay Writing
• How to Write a Report
• Academic Referencing
• Assignment Finishing Touches
• Reflecting on Marked Work
• 6 Skills You Learn in School That You Use in Real Life
• Top 10 Tips on How to Study While Working
• Exam Skills

Get the SkillsYouNeed Study Skills eBook

Part of the Skills You Need Guide for Students .

• Writing a Dissertation or Thesis
• Research Methods
• Teaching, Coaching, Mentoring and Counselling
• Employability Skills for Graduates

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This page covers the basics of understanding what is meant by the word ‘ theory ’ and how theories are developed. 

As well as describing theory the page gives a brief introduction to the steps involved in the construction of theory, in an academic or scientific context.

A theory is a method we use to give us understanding. 

One of the major purposes of a theory is to provide an answer to the question ‘ why? ’.  Asking, ‘ why? ’, to increase your knowledge of a subject area and realign your thoughts and opinions is an essential skill for anybody who wants to learn and develop.

‘ Why ’ is one of the very first questions that children ask:

• “Can you get ready for bed now?” … “ Oh why ? ”
• “ Why is snow cold? ”
• “ Why do I have to go to school tomorrow? ”
• “ Why is the sky blue? ”

Questions like these, from children, can be endless. Often finding or providing suitable explanations can be exhausting and frustrating – perhaps we resort to saying, “ Well it just is! ”  At the basis of such questions however, are a child’s first attempts to understand the world around them, and develop their own theories of why things are the way they are.

Defining ‘theory’, therefore, has to take into account the ‘why?’ question, but a theory is deeper than that.  The points below go some way to helping with a definition.

A theory is an attempt to explain why and so to provide understanding.

A theory is not just ‘any’ explanation - a theory comes into being when a series of ideas come to be held and accepted by a wider community of people.

A theory is not necessarily factually based – how we understand and provide explanations arises from our cultural background and how we view the world.

Understanding Theory

Although there are no hard and fast rules, modern theory is usually developed through a series of steps, by academics and scientists.

It is important to understand that the steps to theory development, as listed on this page, are generally thought of as being sequential – one step follows the last.

In reality there is often more than one of these processes being engaged in at any one time.

From Observation to Understanding

• Observation (usually the effect)
• Description
• Possible theory - hypothesis
• Reading - placing individual understanding in context
• More reading
• Accepting, rejecting or modifying a hypothesis
• Theory – understanding why – and this being accepted by a wider community of people

Observation and Description

Observation may include personal or professional experience and wider reading on the subject.  What we usually observe is not the cause, but the effect.  In undertaking research, observation is an important research method.

From observation, the next step is usually description; this is what ‘appears’ to be happening.  Description provides the surface view; think about the fabled, simple observation of an apple falling to the ground which led Isaac Newton to the theory of gravitation (which eventually became the universal laws of gravitation).

Hypothesis – The Research Question

Following on from observation and description, a tentative understanding as to ‘why’ may be formulated and this is known as a hypothesis or the research question.  This is usually to explore the cause, e.g. ‘why’ the apple fell to the ground?

Reading and Placing in Context

Reading from a wide range of sources is important; reading may take place at any stage within this sequence of events.  Reading allows the researcher to place their information in context.  It is usual for the researcher to have undertaken a considerable amount of reading prior to undertaking their research.

It is also possible that reading around the subject leads to a new research question.  Whilst reading around a subject to gain an understanding, a researcher may discover a ‘gap’ in the current knowledge that they wish to fill.

Research is then undertaken to ‘test’ the hypothesis or to explore the research question.  For the natural scientist, this usually involves controlled scientific experimentation, which is repeatable time and time again and should provide the same (or similar) results.

For the social scientist or social researcher, such experimentation is more difficult, sometimes impossible to orchestrate.  There are, however, many research tools that a social researcher can deploy to investigate their research question.

Accepting, Rejecting, or Modifying a Hypothesis: The Research Question

Once research has been undertaken within scientific research this can lead to accepting, rejecting, or modifying the hypothesis.  For the social researcher there may not be any firm conclusions drawn to allow this process to take place; it is usual that research leads to more research and further questions being explored.  Definitive answers may be difficult to ascertain - there may be a host of reasons given and these reasons may change over time.  Research findings from both the scientific and the social research community do, however, need to be discussed more widely prior to their becoming accepted.

This process is usually undertaken with a ‘discussion’ of findings with the wider community, e.g. other researchers and academics with an interest in the area. Within academia this can involve presenting findings and papers at conferences and seminars. This means that the findings from the research undertaken do not exist in isolation.  Other academics may wish to carry out similar experiments etc.

Publication

The wider academic community exists, in part, to contribute to and/or scrutinise the content of academic materials, research journals, articles or chapters in books.    What is important is that these areas are ‘ peer reviewed ’ prior to publication and the research presented is rigorously debated.  The researcher may be asked to review their work prior to publication or indeed it may be rejected.  Once published, such ideas can become part of the ‘system of ideas’.

Theories around particular subjects tend to fall in and out of ‘fashion’.  As society changes, additional information is discovered or attitudes change then so too do theories and the explanation as to ‘why’.  Whilst this is the case, it is important to remember that even though theories may come to be discredited over time - as thinking about a subject changes - they can prove highly influential.  A good example here, might be the work of Sigmund Freud.

Social Understanding

Gaining an understanding around the behaviour of people and society is much more problematic (people are inconsistent and society is constantly changing) than within the natural sciences, where natural phenomena are generally more consistent.

It is also important to note that within this realm, it is easier to appreciate that understandings and theories created are specific to the people or persons who are creating the theory, the time and place in which they were writing, i.e. their whole social, cultural and economic context. 

Their observations (as are our own) are biased, that is, seen through their eyes and understood from their own background, assumptions etc.  Theories and ideas, therefore, can be built upon and expanded and can be discredited.  Even so, certain theoretical perspectives have had enormous influence around our thinking, understanding and practice within our society, such as the work of Sigmund Freud.

Our understanding about ourselves changes and evolves throughout time as society changes.

Education is about gaining an understanding about how and why people, society, and the natural world work.  Being educated enables us to reflect upon the world around us and our understanding of it - to be aware of changes and never to stop asking ‘why?’

Continue to: Note-Taking for Verbal Exchanges Effective Reading

See also: Finding Time for Study | Sources of Information Note-Taking for Reading | Planning an Essay

Rhetorical functions in academic writing: Using theory

Introduction.

It is clear that in academic life, theory is vitally important. If you do not situate your work in theory, it will not be taken very seriously, or, if you are a student, it will be marked down. Your claims need to be supported with theory and you need to compare your claims with theories and results reported in the literature.

What is a theory

A theory is a coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena.

As well as the word "theory", academic researchers use other terms to refer to their explanations and interpretations of phenomena.

• A perspective is a wider approach. It is more general than a theory.
• A model is a narrow, simpler explanation or interpretation of a specific phenomenon. it is judged on how useful it is.
• A hypothesis commonly refers to a prediction or a hunch about a new phenomenon. It needs to be tested
• A theoretical framework can be as wide as a perspective or a narrow as a model.

It is important to be careful about the use of the word "theory". In everyday use, "theory" means a guess or a hunch, something that needs to be proved. In academic English, this would be called a hypothesis.

In the academic world, a theory is not a guess or a hunch. It's "a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations" (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014, p 15). It pulls together all the facts about something and provides an explanation that combines all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In the academic world, a theory is the ultimate goal and it is as close to proved as anything in science can be.

It is also important not to confuse the following:

• Fact : Facts are observations about the world around us.
• Hypothesis : A tentative explanation for a phenomenon made as a starting point for investigation.
• Law : A general description about how some aspect of the world behaves under certain circumstances.
• Theory : A well-substantiated explanation acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.

 What are theories for?

The purpose of a theory is to provide accurate explanations and/or interpretations of phenomena.

Three other purposes of theories are (Thomas, 2007):

Organisation

Theories are used to organise phenomena in ways that help us to think about them clearly and efficiently.

Theories also allow us too make predictions about what will happen in future situations.

Generation of new research

Theories are also used to generate new research by raising new questions.

Types of theory

According to Dubin (1969), theories have two distinct goals:

The theory has predictive power.In other words, it focusses on outcomes. An example is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

Understanding

The theory specifies rules that account for and explain all observed arrangements of the data. It focusses on the processes of interaction of the data. Examples are SWOT and PESTLE.

Use of theories

A)   Describing Involves: Naming, describing & defining. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference. It show that you know about the theory. B) Understanding   Involves: Naming, describing & defining. You should name the relevant theory or theories, provide an appropriate reference, and explain how it works. It show you understand the theory. C) Locating   Involves: Naming, describing, defining  and locating. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference, and explain how your work is connected to it. It show you understand the theory and how your research is situated in and informed by theory. D)  Analysing and discussing Involves: Naming, describing, analysing  and explaining. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference, and explain how it is composed and how it is related to other theories. It shows you understand the theory by using it to explain or understand a real world issue. E) Applying   Involves: Naming, describing, defining, discussing, analysing  and applying. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference, discuss it and apply it to a real world issue. It shows that you understand the theory by applying it to a real world issue, or linking it relevantly to a real world issue. F)  Justifying Involves: Naming, describing, analysing  and justifying. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference, apply the theory to a real world issue to justify it. It shows you can use the theory to justify a real world issue. G) Predicting Involves: Naming, describing, analysing  and predicting. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference, discuss the theory, apply it and use it to discuss the future. It shows you can use the theory to predict something in the real world. H)   Synthesising Involves: Naming, describing, Synthesising  and applying. You should name the relevant theory or theories, and provide an appropriate reference, relate the theory to other theories and real world issues. It shows you understand the theory by applying it to a real world issue, and Synthesising it with a real world issue. I)   Evaluation Involves: Naming, describing, analysing and evaluating. If you evaluate something, you judge how good or bad it is or how useful it is – in your context. You can use the theory to evaluate a real world issue or use the real world . J)   Testing Involves: Naming, describing, analysing and testing. If you test something, you judge how good or bad it is or how useful it is – in your context. Academic testing is usually detailed and requires you to analyse a situation or issue first, and then assess the theory in your context. K)   Building Involves: Naming, describing, analysing, testing and developing. If you build on something, you develop and make it better  – in your context. You should describe and analyse the theory first, and then show how you develop the theory to make it more applicable to your context.

Statement of Theory

Before you can discuss/apply a principle/model/theory, you need to present it and explain it, at the same time making it clear from whom and where you have obtained the ideas you are discussing . For example

According to Darwin’s (1859) ...

Porter’s (1980) Five Forces model refers to ...

The Theorem of Pythagoras states that ...

Brown (1983, p. 231) states that ...

Here are some more expressions you can use to introduce and explain a theory or principle.

The work of X indicates that ... The work of X reveals that ... The work of X shows that ... Turning to X, one finds that ... Reference to X reveals that ... In a study of Y, X found that ... As X points out, ... As X states, ... As X has indicated, ... A study by X shows that ... X has drawn attention to the fact that ... X correctly argues that ... X rightly points out that ... X makes clear that ...

According to X... It is the view of X that ... The opinion of X is that ... In an article by X, ... Research by X suggests that ... X has expressed a similar view. X reports that ... X notes that ... X states that ... X observes that ... X concludes that ... X argues that ... X found that ... X discovered that ...

Application

You can then apply it to your own context.

This seems to indicate that... This means that ... Therefore ... According to this theory ... Here we see ... From this, we can understand ... In other words ... It follows that ... The implications are therefore that ... It must therefore be the case that... The indications are therefore that... It is clear therefore that ... On this basis it may be inferred that... Given this ..., it can be seen that... As a result ... As a consequence ... This leads to ...

In short, In a word, In brief, To sum up, To conclude, To summarise In conclusion, On the whole, Altogether, In all, .... It is generally widely accepted argued held believed that .... Therefore, Thus, On this basis, Given this, it can may be concluded deduced inferred that... . From Table 1 it can may be seen concluded shown estimated calculated inferred that .... the table figures data results information In conclusion, Finally we/may say it can/may be said that ....

Further details

Evaluating theories.

You can evaluate theories. See: Writing Functions 12: Evaluating

Indicating a gap

You can use theories to justify the present or further work by indicating a gap. See:  Writing Functions 19: Indicating a Gap

Comparing & Contrasting

When you are working with theories, you will compare and contrast the different ideas and your own, discussing advantages and disadvantages. See:  Writing Functions 13: Comparing

Synthesising

You will need to summarise other people's ideas, combine them with theories and come to conclusions. See:  Writing Reporting Synthesis

Generalising

In most cases, the conclusions you come to from your theories and the points of view you hold will be qualified and generalisations will be made. See:  Writing Functions 14: Generalising

Expressing degree of certainty

You may also have different degrees of certainty about your claims based on your theories. See:  Writing Functions 15: Certainty

Arguing and discussing

Theories will usually be involved in providing evidence to support your points of view and conclusions in an argument. See:  Writing Functions 11: Arguing and discussing

Providing support

You can use theories to provide evidence to support your points of view and conclusions. See:  Writing Functions 18: Supporting

One thing that you learn in higher education is how to analyse. It is an essential part of writing critically. You can analyse theories. See: Writing Functions 17: Analysis

Supporting an argument: Illustrating and exemplifying ideas

You can use theories as examples or illustrations to support your conclusions. See:  Writing Functions 8: Examples

Giving reasons and explanations

And you will always give reasons and explanations for your claims and points of view. Theories can be used. See:  Writing Functions 16: Reasons

Drawing conclusions

At various stages during your writing, you will need to sum up your argument and come to a conclusion based on your theories. See:  Writing Functions 23: Concluding

Back to Introduction

English and Comparative Literary Studies

Foundation module: critical theory - essay tips.

There are a number of ways to conceive of the Critical Theory essay. The simplest is to choose one of the set authors or topics and write on that with suggestions from the relevant tutor.

Slightly more ambitious is to compare and contrast theorists especially if there is a debate between them or one has criticised the other and there is an implicit or explicit dialogue between them. There may be topics where literary or other texts and readings of them have been deliberately built into the syllabus, e.g. readings by Baudelaire and Benjamin of Poe’s ‘The Man in the Crowd’ or Freud’s analyses of dreams and symptoms. Here you might give an account of the readings of these texts and how they are motivated by the theoretical premises and feed their own contributions to or disagreements with those readings into the discussion of the relevant theoretical frameworks. More ambitiously, and perhaps only to be attempted by the more theoretically confident students, is to select a literary or cultural text and generate a reading within a given theoretical framework or in relation to certain theoretical issues.

In both the last two options it must be stressed that this is a critical theory essay, not just an essay on a literary text, and the readings of the latter are there only to forward the discussion of the theoretical issues being addressed and should be organised to confirm, complicate or query the terms of the relevant theoretical issues and frameworks. We don’t want an essay that is mainly just a reading of poem x or novel y (you have other modules in which to do that).

The bottom line here is that students should be able to analyse the work of one of the theorists studied, to be able to explain their key terms, how they operate and the problems they are addressing. The more ambitious will want to play different theories off against each other and consider the limitations, blindspots or weak points of the theoretical frameworks being addressed. The starting point should be the texts read and discussed in the seminars, while the more confident will move a bit beyond them. However, the essay is only 6,000 words and that doesn’t leave much scope for too much ranging around. The essays should be focussed on particular theoretical essays and chapters and the structure of the argument as laid out there. You should think of yourself as giving an account of or arguing with particular theoretical texts and the arguments and terms deployed in them. Sweeping generalisations about Marxism or Psychoanalysis or Deconstruction should be avoided in favour of textually focussed argument.

Most importantly all students must have a discussion with the tutor responsible for each module and agree a topic and especially a title in advance so that we have a list of agreed titles (even if these may evolve in the writing process). This is an opportunity to get some guidance as to reading as well as to the formulation of the topic and title, and it should have happened by the end of the term in which the module is taken.

Quick links

• Directories
• Make a Gift

Writing Papers That Apply Sociological Theories or Perspectives

This document is intended as an additional resource for undergraduate students taking sociology courses at UW. It is not intended to replace instructions from your professors and TAs. In all cases follow course-specific assignment instructions, and consult your TA or professor if you have questions.

About These Assignments

Theory application assignments are a common type of analytical writing assigned in sociology classes.  Many instructors expect you to apply sociological theories (sometimes called "perspectives" or "arguments") to empirical phenomena. [1]   There are different ways to do this, depending upon your objectives, and of course, the specifics of each assignment. You can choose cases that confirm (support), disconfirm (contradict), [2]  or partially confirm any theory.   

How to Apply Theory to Empirical Phenomena

Theory application assignments generally require you to look at empirical phenomena through the lens of theory.  Ask yourself, what would the theory predict ("have to say") about a particular situation. According to the theory, if particular conditions are present or you see a change in a particular variable, what outcome should you expect? 

Generally, a first step in a theory application assignment is to make certain you understand the theory! You should be able to state the theory (the author's main argument) in a sentence or two.  Usually, this means specifying the causal relationship (X—>Y) or the causal model (which might involve multiple variables and relationships). 

For those taking sociological theory classes, in particular, you need to be aware that theories are constituted by more than causal relationships.  Depending upon the assignment, you may be asked to specify the following:

• Causal Mechanism: This is a detailed explanation about how X—>Y, often made at a lower level of analysis (i.e., using smaller units) than the causal relationship.
• Level of Analysis: Macro-level theories refer to society- or group-level causes and processes; micro-level theories address individual-level causes and processes.
• Scope Conditions: These are parameters or boundaries specified by the theorist that identify the types of empirical phenomena to which the theory applies.
• Assumptions: Most theories begin by assuming certain "facts." These often concern the bases of human behavior: for example, people are inherently aggressive or inherently kind, people act out of self-interest or based upon values, etc.

Theories vary in terms of whether they specify assumptions, scope conditions and causal mechanisms.  Sometimes they can only be inferred: when this is the case, be clear about that in your paper.

Clearly understanding all the parts of a theory helps you ensure that you are applying the theory correctly to your case. For example, you can ask whether your case fits the theory's assumptions and scope conditions.  Most importantly, however, you should single out the main argument or point (usually the causal relationship and mechanism) of the theory.  Does the theorist's key argument apply to your case? Students often go astray here by latching onto an inconsequential or less important part of the theory reading, showing the relationship to their case, and then assuming they have fully applied the theory.

Using Evidence to Make Your Argument

Theory application papers involve making a claim or argument based on theory, supported by empirical evidence. [3]   There are a few common problems that students encounter while writing these types of assignments: unsubstantiated claims/generalizations; "voice" issues or lack of attribution; excessive summarization/insufficient analysis.  Each class of problem is addressed below, followed by some pointers for choosing "cases," or deciding upon the empirical phenomenon to which you will apply the theoretical perspective or argument (including where to find data).

A common problem seen in theory application assignments is failing to substantiate claims, or making a statement that is not backed up with evidence or details ("proof").  When you make a statement or a claim, ask yourself, "How do I know this?"  What evidence can you marshal to support your claim? Put this evidence in your paper (and remember to cite your sources).  Similarly, be careful about making overly strong or broad claims based on insufficient evidence.  For example, you probably don't want to make a claim about how Americans feel about having a black president based on a poll of UW undergraduates.  You may also want to be careful about making authoritative (conclusive) claims about broad social phenomena based on a single case study.

In addition to un- or under-substantiated claims, another problem that students often encounter when writing these types of papers is lack of clarity regarding "voice," or whose ideas they are presenting.  The reader is left wondering whether a given statement represents the view of the theorist, the student, or an author who wrote about the case.  Be careful to identify whose views and ideas you are presenting. For example, you could write, "Marx views class conflict as the engine of history;" or, "I argue that American politics can best be understood through the lens of class conflict;" [4]  or, "According to Ehrenreich, Walmart employees cannot afford to purchase Walmart goods."

Another common problem that students encounter is the trap of excessive summarization.  They spend the majority of their papers simply summarizing (regurgitating the details) of a case—much like a book report.  One way to avoid this is to remember that theory indicates which details (or variables) of a case are most relevant, and to focus your discussion on those aspects.  A second strategy is to make sure that you relate the details of the case in an analytical fashion. You might do this by stating an assumption of Marxist theory, such as "man's ideas come from his material conditions," and then summarizing evidence from your case on that point.  You could organize the details of the case into paragraphs and start each paragraph with an analytical sentence about how the theory relates to different aspects of the case. 

Some theory application papers require that you choose your own case (an empirical phenomenon, trend, situation, etc.), whereas others specify the case for you (e.g., ask you to apply conflict theory to explain some aspect of globalization described in an article). Many students find choosing their own case rather challenging.  Some questions to guide your choice are:

• Can I obtain sufficient data with relative ease on my case?
• Is my case specific enough?  If your subject matter is too broad or abstract, it becomes both difficult to gather data and challenging to apply the theory.
• Is the case an interesting one? Professors often prefer that you avoid examples used by the theorist themselves, those used in lectures and sections, and those that are extremely obvious.

Where You Can Find Data

Data is collected by many organizations (e.g., commercial, governmental, nonprofit, academic) and can frequently be found in books, reports, articles, and online sources.  The UW libraries make your job easy: on the front page of the library website ( www.lib.washington.edu ), in the left hand corner you will see a list of options under the heading "Find It" that allows you to go directly to databases, specific online journals, newspapers, etc. For example, if you are choosing a historical case, you might want to access newspaper articles.  This has become increasingly easy to do, as many are now online through the UW library.  For example, you can search The New York Times and get full-text online for every single issue from 1851 through today!  If you are interested in interview or observational data, you might try to find books or articles that are case-studies on your topic of interest by conducting a simple keyword search of the UW library book holdings, or using an electronic database, such as JSTOR or Sociological Abstracts.  Scholarly articles are easy to search through, since they contain abstracts, or paragraphs that summarize the topic, relevant literature, data and methods, and major findings.  When using JSTOR, you may want to limit your search to sociology (which includes 70 journals) and perhaps political science; this database retrieves full-text articles. Sociological Abstracts will cast a wider net searching many more sociology journals, but the article may or may not be available online (find out by clicking "check for UW holdings").  A final word about using academic articles for data: remember that you need to cite your sources, and follow the instructions of your assignment.  This includes making your own argument about your case, not using an argument you find in a scholarly article.

In addition, there are many data sources online.  For example, you can get data from the US census, including for particular neighborhoods, from a number of cites. You can get some crime data online: the Seattle Police Department publishes several years' worth of crime rates.  There are numerous cites on public opinion, including gallup.com. There is an online encyclopedia on Washington state history, including that of individual Seattle neighborhoods ( www.historylink.org ). These are just a couple options: a simple google search will yield hundreds more.  Finally, remember that librarian reference desks are expert on data sources, and that you can call, email, or visit in person to ask about what data is available on your particular topic.  You can chat with a librarian 24 hours a day online, as well (see the "Ask Us!" link on the front page of UW libraries website for contact information).

[1] By empirical phenomena, we mean some sort of observed, real-world conditions. These include societal trends, events, or outcomes. They are sometimes referred to as "cases."   Return to Reading

[2] A cautionary note about critiquing theories: no social theory explains all cases, so avoid claiming that a single case "disproves" a theory, or that a single case "proves" a theory correct. Moreover, if you choose a case that disconfirms a theory, you should be careful that the case falls within the scope conditions (see above) of the given theory. For example, if a theorist specifies that her argument pertains to economic transactions, it would not be a fair critique to say the theory doesn't explain dynamics within a family. On the other hand, it is useful and interesting to apply theories to cases not foreseen by the original theorist (we see this in sociological theories that incorporate theories from evolutionary biology or economics).   Return to Reading

[3] By empirical evidence, we mean data on social phenomena, derived from scientific observation or experiment.  Empirical evidence may be quantitative (e.g., statistical data) or qualitative (e.g., descriptions derived from systematic observation or interviewing), or a mixture of both. Empirical evidence must be observable and derived from real-world conditions (present or historical) rather than hypothetical or "imagined".  For additional help, see the "Where You Can Find Data" section on the next page.   Return to Reading

[4] If your instructor does not want you to use the first-person, you could write, "This paper argues…"   Return to Reading

•   Instagram
•   LinkedIn
•   Twitter
•   Newsletter

• University Library

How do I reference a theory in my essay?

Referencing a theory, model or a test in your assignments. 

• FiNDit Support
• Have Your Say
• Library Announcements
• Student Wellbeing
• University FAQs
• 60 Academic support
• 25 Access issues
• 32 Blackboard
• 71 Borrowing
• 23 Copyright
• 50 Databases
• 86 Finding information
• 85 IT Services
• 46 My Library
• 26 Print/copy/scan
• 34 Reading Lists
• 192 Referencing
• 15 Refworks
• 18 Research support

Answered By: Reeti Brar Last Updated: Jul 01, 2022     Views: 18102

When referring to a model, theory, or test, you only need to provide a citation the first time the model, theory, or test is mentioned in the text. After that, it is not necessary to keep including the citations when the model, theory, or test is mentioned again. Example:

Cite the first time you mention the theory in the text:

 “Leader–member exchange (LMX) theory (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995) is . . . .”

After that, you can just use the phrase:

 “LMX theory” without providing the citations.

Please note when mentioning a theory, philosophy, therapy, or technique, and also disorders, the rule is not to capitalise e.g. cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). Acronyms are capitalized to show they are acronyms, not because the terms that form them are necessarily capitalized.

Another example of how to cite a theory:

One theory of exceptional employee behaviour posits that star employees “have disproportionately high and prolonged performance, visibility, and relevant social capital” (Call, Nyberg, & Thatcher, 2015, p. 630).

Also refer to the links below from the American Psychological Association APA style blog.

Chicago 17:

Though usage varies widely, Chicago recommends that names of laws, theories, and the like be lowercased, except for proper names attached to them. For example:

Avogadro’s hypothesis (or Avogadro’s law)

the big bang theory Boyle’s law

(Einstein’s) general theory of relativity

Newton’s first law

Cite the source of the theory according to the resource type in your footnotes. You can then follow the rules for abbreviated/short form footnotes for subsequent citations referring to the same work.

Links & Files

• When to include the year in citations appearing more than once in a paragraph
• Do I capitalize this word?
• Punctuation junction: Quotation marks and ellipses
• Do you have to quote a whole sentence?
• How do I reference a direct quote in APA referencing style?
• If I am referencing a research paper, but it quotes other research papers, do I have to cite those too?
• Do I have to provide page numbers if I APA reference a quote or write about an author's idea in my essay?
• Chicago: Laws and theories
• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 3 No 0

Comments (0)