1

OSCI8640—001 Syllabus

Theory Construction (Doctoral Seminar)

Fall 2012, Friday Bldg Room 117, Wed 1:00p-4:00p

Instructor: Dr. Jared Hansen Office Hours: Friday 250B, before/after class and by appointment

Office Phone: 704-687-7303

Email: jared.hansen@uncc.edu Important Note: E-mail is the best contact method. Please put “Theory--” in subject heading. If you don’t,

I can’t assure you it will get to me in a timely way.

Course Description and Objectives

This doctoral seminar focuses on theory construction in business-related research . That

is, what is theory and what is it not? What makes a theory successful or a ‘good theory’?

Or, what is it about certain theories that lead to them being used and cited more by other

researchers? These are a few of the questions that we’ll be reviewing in this course.

Theory construction is an important topic for both conceptual and empirical research in

any academic research area, and we will be taking a cross discipline approach to how to

actually write better theory.

In this seminar, we’ll review the building blocks of good theory through (1) research on

best practices in theory construction across business disciplines, (2) review of several

successful theories from information systems, organizational science, finance, economics,

strategy, marketing, and other business related areas, and (3) picking apart several journal

award winning theory papers that we'll use for templates. Topics will range from micro to

macro concepts.

Participant Responsibilities: 1. Each week: Read articles, summarize selected articles, prepare exercises (including

reviewing your colleagues’ work).

2. In-class interaction central to learning.

3. Ongoing development of hypotheses and research design for proposal(s) or paper. Final

'mini-'proposal' will contain theoretical motivation, hypotheses, research design, proposed

test statistics and implications if hypotheses supported.

Learning Objectives (Seminar Knowledge Goals): 1. Information: Knowledge of basic conceptual issues in theory development, design options,

different research modes, data sources, design options..

2. Competencies: Assess theories, develop testable hypotheses, design studies in

organizational contexts, pick appropriate statistical method to test theory, identify test

statistics for specific hypotheses, match methods and theory, critically review empirical work,

draft parts of scholarly articles.

2

3. Core skills: Ability to execute separate parts of 'normal science' project within professional

norms including basic rules of inference and quasi-experimental design.

4. Advanced and additional skills: Ability to develop impactful hypotheses; ability to focus

and shape scholarly research project; long term career issues

Required Materials/Readings

There is no mandatory textbook for this doctoral seminar. A listing of required scholarly

reading selections will be posted to the course web page. Each week we will discusss

omewhere between six to about a dozen or so scholarly articles. The articles may be found in

the online databases of the campus library. PDF copies or links to PDF copies will also be

posted online at least one week in advance. Any changes to the list will be announced at least

one week in advance.

Supplementary Materials (Not Required) Hunt, Shelby D. (2003), Controversy in Marketing Theory: For Reason, Realism, Truth, and

Objectivity. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.

Hunt, Shelby D. (2002), Foundations of Marketing Theory: Toward a General Theory of

Marketing. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.

Attendance Policy and Course Schedule

Students are required to know the content from all class discussions and reading

assignments. If students elect to miss a class, they are responsible for getting notes on the

missed material. If a student chooses to miss class due to a non-University approved

reason, the student will not receive credit for any in class exercises, quizzes, exams, etc.,

occurring or due on that day. Further, classes begin promptly. If students are late for

presentations, they will be docked participation points.

The standards and requirements set forth in this syllabus may be modified at any time by

the course instructor. Notice of such changes will be by announcement in class, email

notice to the official class roster, or by changes to this syllabus posted on the course

website at http://belkfaculty.uncc.edu/jhanse15 under Courses.

Grading Grading (A = 90% or above, B = 80% to 89.9%, C = 70% to 79.9%, U < 70%) will be based

on general class participation and discussion of readings, presenting your own work in class,

submitted exercises, reviewing other students' exercises, and the final proposal/paper. In

general, our goal is to encourage risk-taking and effort. Thus, I will assess most submitted

exercises only in terms of whether they are (1) exceptionally good, (2) good and reasonable

or (3) problematic.

3

Your final grade will be assessed based on:

Written summaries, exercise, and reviews 40%

In class discussion and presentations 30%

Final proposal/paper & presentation 30%

Description of Assignments and Grading

Exercises: As this is doctoral seminar, most assignments will take the form of written

exercises that have participants practice writing academic research, usually in the form of

a couple paragraphs to a few pages at a time.

Class Participation: Students’ participation will be evaluated based on active class

involvement. Students will take turns in leading seminar discussions. Disrespectful or

disturbing behavior of students during class time will have a substantial negative impact

on the class participation grade. Students are strongly encouraged to actively share their

views in class discussions since the final participation grade is determined based on both

attendance quizzes and class involvement.

Final Paper: The final exam takes the form of a new conceptual research paper. More

information will be made available in class.

Students in this course seeking accommodations for disabilities must first consult with

the Office of Disability Services and follow the instructions of that office for obtaining

accommodations.

Academic Integrity

Karl G. Maeser, a 19th

century educator, is quoted as once stating: "I have been asked

what I mean by my word of honor. I will tell you. Place me behind prison walls-- ever so

high, ever so thick, reaching ever so far into the ground - there is a possibility that in

some way or another I will escape; but stand me on a floor and draw a chalk line around

me and have me give my word of honor never to cross it. Can I get out of the Circle? No.

Never! I would die first." I expect students, guest speakers, visitors, and faculty

(including myself) to follow the principles of honor and honesty described in the

quotation. To provide further guidance on how to do this, all students are required by the

university to read and abide by the Code of Student Academic Integrity. Violations of the

Code of Student Academic Integrity, including plagiarism, will result in disciplinary

action as provided in the Code. Definitions and examples of plagiarism are set forth in the

Code. The Code is available from the Dean of Students Office or online at:

http://www.legal.uncc.edu/policies/ps-105.html . The normal penalty for a first offense is

zero credit on the work involving dishonesty and further substantial reduction of the

course grade. In almost all cases the course grade is reduced to F. Copies of the code can

also be obtained from the Dean of Students Office.

4

Inclement Weather

University Policy Statement #13. The University is open unless the Chancellor announces

that the University is closed. The inclement weather hotline number to call is 704-786-

2877. In the event of inclement weather, check your email the morning of class. Your

instructor will use his best judgment as to whether class should be held understanding

that some of you commute from far away and notify you by email if class is cancelled.

On Respect

The college has asked all faculty to refer to the College Statement on Diversity in syllabi.

It is available on the college website. For info on how to actually incorporate diversity

into business or academic settings, I advise interested individuals to read the conclusion

section of my published research on Understanding Ethical Diversity in Organizations

(published in Organizational Science), found on my website under the research tab.

I will conduct this class in an atmosphere of mutual respect. I encourage active

participation in class discussions. Each of us may have strongly differing opinions on the

various topics of class discussions. The conflict of ideas is encouraged and welcome. The

orderly questioning of the ideas of others, including mine, is similarly welcome. However,

I will exercise my responsibility to manage the discussions so that ideas and argument

can proceed in an orderly fashion. Participants should expect that if their conduct during

class discussions seriously disrupts the atmosphere of mutual respect I expect in this class,

they will not be permitted to participate further.

Further, all students are required to abide by the UNC Charlotte Sexual Harassment

Policy (http://www.legal.uncc.edu/policies/ps-61.html) and the policy on Responsible

Use of University Computing and Electronic Communication Resources

(http://www.legal.uncc.edu/policies/ps-66.html).

Cell phones must be set to vibrate/silent mode or turned off during class. Cell phone calls

or text messaging in class will result in a participation deduction. Other behavior that

disrupts the learning of other students will also result in a deduction per incident. It is

possible to deduct more points then the normal points allocated for participation.

Classroom civility expectations are that all individuals will follow all other university

guidelines.

.

5

Tentative Course Calendar

Date Tentative Topic Exercises

22-Aug What is the Goal (of Scientific Research)

29-Aug What is Theory DV identification Exercise Due

5-Sep What is Good Theory… Interesting/Novel

Big Questions Due

12-Sep What is Good Theory… Hypotheses/Persuasion

DV paragraphs Due

19-Sep What is Good Theory… The Review Process

DV paragraphs revision due

26-Sep How to Build Theory

3-Oct Selected Marketing Theories IV1 paragraphs Due

10-Oct Selected Management Theories IV2 paragraphs Due

17-Oct Selected Finance Theories IV2 paragraphs Due

24-Oct Selected Information Systems Theories IV2 paragraphs Due

31-Oct Selected Other Theories IV2 paragraphs Due

7-Nov Theory Boundaries: Moderators Moderators Paragraphs Due

14-Nov Reviewing as a method of improving theory writing

Back End and Introduction Due

21-Nov Thanksgiving Holiday

28-Nov Theory Paper Presentations Paper Draft Due for Peer Reviews

5-Dec Job Interviewing and the First Six Years Peer Paper Reviews Due

12-Dec Final Paper Due

A reading list for each topic is found on the course website. As this is an evolutionary course based on the students’ questions and progress each week, the lists may occasionally be updated up to a week in advance of a particular date. An initial tentative copy is included below for initial referencing.

6

Initial (Tentative) List of Readings by Seminar Date.

This list may be updated during the semester as needed. Updates will be announced at

least a week in advance.

22-Aug: What is the Goal (of Scientific Research)

What is Science Fowler, R.D. (1990), "Psychology: The Core Discipline," American Psychologist, 45 (January), 1-6. Hunt, S. D. (1976), "The Nature and Scope of Marketing," Journal of Marketing, 40 (July), 17-28. Alberts, B. and Shine, K. (1994), “Scientists and the Integrity of Research,” Science, 226 (December), 1660-1662. The Goal According to Relativism Based Views Russell, B. (1960), "Can Scientists or Anyone Know Anything?" in An Outline of Philosophy. New York, NY: The World Publishing Company. (see moodle for copy) Nagel, E. (1961), "Social Science Defended" (excerpt), in The Structure of Science, 473-476, 480-485. Feyerabend, P. (1975), Against Method. London, UK: Verso, 17-28, 295-309. (see moodle for copy) Anderson, P.F. (1983), "Marketing, Scientific Progress, and Scientific Method," Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 18-31. Peter, J. P. and J.C. Olson (1983), "Is Science Marketing?" Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 111-125. The Goal According to Scientific Realism Hunt, S.D. (1990), "Truth in Marketing Theory and Research," Journal of Marketing, 54 (July), 1-15. Hunt, S.D. (1991), "Positivism and Paradigm Dominance in Consumer Research: Toward Critical Pluralism and Rapprochement," Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (June), 32-44 Hunt, S.D. (1992), "For Reason and Realism in Marketing," Journal of Marketing, 56 (April), 89-102. Hunt, S.D. (1993), "Objectivity in Marketing Theory and Research," Journal of Marketing, 57 (April), 76-91.

29-Aug: What is Theory

Hunt, S.D. (1983), "General Theories and the Fundamental Explananda of Marketing," Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 9-17. Whetten, D. (1989), What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution? Academy of Management Review, 4: 490-495. Van de Ven, A. (1989). “Nothing is Quite so Practical as a Good Theory,” Academy of Management Review, 14: 486-489. Bacharach, S. (1989), “Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation,” Academy of Management Review, 14: 496-515. Sutton, R. & Staw, B. (1995), “What Theory is Not,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 371-384. Weick, K. (1995), “What Theory is Not, Theorizing Is,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 385-390. DiMaggio, P. (1995), “Comments on "What Theory is Not",” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 391-

7

397. Corley, K. and Gioia, D. (2011), “Building Theory about Theory Building: What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?” Academy of Management Review, 36: 12-32.

5-Sept: What is Good Theory…How to Be Interesting/Novel

Davis, M. (1971), “That’s Interesting!” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1: 309-344. From the Editors. (2011). “Publishing in AMJ: Part 3-Setting the Hook,” Academy of Management Review. Voss, G.B. (2003), “Formulating Interesting Research Questions,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 356-359. Simon, H. A. (1973), "Does Scientific Discovery Have a Logic?" Philosophy of Science, 40, 471-480. Smith, D.C., (2003) “The Importance and Challenges of Being Interesting,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 319-322. Bartunek, J., Rynes, S. & Ireland, D. (2006), “What Makes Management Research Interesting and Why Does it Matter?” Academy of Management Journal, 49: 9-15.

12-Sept: What is Good Theory…How to Write Hypotheses Persuasively

Lundberg, Craig C. (1976), "Hypothesis Creating in Organizational Behavior Research," Academy of Management Review, (April), 5-12. [See especially pp. 9-10.] Platt, J.R. 1964. "Strong Inference." Science, 146: 347-353 [Especially 347-348, and 352] Skipper, R. and M.R. Hyman (1987), "Evaluating and Improving Argument-Centered Works in Marketing," Journal of Marketing, 51 (October), 60-75. Sterrett, S.M. and D.C. Smith (1990), "A Comment on 'Evaluating and Improving Argument-Centered Works in Marketing'," Journal of Marketing, 54 (April), 83-88. Skipper, R. and M.R. Hyman (1990), "Marketing and Logical Deduction," Journal of Marketing, 54 (April), 89-92. Morris, H.C. (1992), "Logical Creativity," Theory and Psychology, 2 (1), 89-107. MacKenzie, S.B. (2003) “The Dangers of Poor Construct Conceptualization,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 323-326. Zaltman, LeMasters, and Heffring, Theory Construction in Marketing, 97-112. (see moodle for copy) Hospers, J. (1967), "Law," in Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of Science, Klemke, et al., eds. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 104-111.

19-Sept: What is Good Theory…The Review Process

Rindova, V.( 2008), “Publishing Theory When you are New to the Game,” Academy of Management Review, 33: 300-303. Day, A. (1997), ‘How to Get Research Published in Journals’”, European Journal of Marketing, 31(11/12), 896-901. Perry, C., Carson, D. and Gilmore, A., (2003) “Joining a Conversation: How to get Published”,

8

Commentary, European Journal of Marketing, Issue 5/6, 652-667. Peters, D.P. and Ceci, S.J. (1982), “Peer Review Practices of Psychological Journals: The Fate of Published Articles, Submitted Again, and its Open Peer Commentary,” The Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 5, 187-255. Polonsky, M., Lawson, R., Uncles, M., Johnson, L.W., Wilkinson, I. and Alpert, F. (1998), “Perspectives on Academic Publishing; Advice for Those Just Starting,” Australasian Marketing Journal, 2(2), 63-80. Saunders, J. and Hirst, A. (2000), “And You Thought it was Bad: The Editorial Process of Journals”, AM 2000 Proceedings, Academy of Marketing Conference, 5-7 July, University of Derby, Nottingham. Parasuraman, A. (2003) “Reflections on Contributing to a Discipline Through Research and Writing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 314-318.

26-Sept: How to Build Theory

Bourgeois, L. J., III (1979), "Toward a Method of Middle-Range Theorizing," Academy of Management Review, 4 (3), 443-447. Zeithaml, V.A., P.R. Varadarajan, and C.P. Zeithaml (1988), "The Contingency Approach: Its Foundations and Relevance to Theory Building and Research in Marketing," European Journal of Marketing, 22 (7), 37-64. Summers, J.O. (2002), “Guidelines for Conducting Research and Publishing in Marketing: From Conceptualisation Through the Review Process,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29 (4), 405-415. Weick, K.E. (1989), “Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination,” Academy of Management Review, 14 (4) 516-531. Suddaby, R., Hardy, C. & Huy, Q.( 2011), “Where are the New Theories of Organizations?” Academy of Management Review, 36: 236-246. Murray, J.B., D.J. Evers, and S.Janda (1995), "Marketing, Theory Borrowing, and Critical Reflection," Journal of Macromarketing, 15 (Fall), 92-106. Oswick, C., Fleming, P., & Hanlon, G. (2011), “From Borrowing to Blending: Rethinking the Processes of Organizational Theory Building,” Academy of Management Review, 36: 318-337. Shepherd, D. & Sutcliffe, K. (2011), “Inductive Top-Down Theorizing: A Source of New Theories of Organization,” Academy of Management Review, 36: 361-380. Tuli, K.R., A.K. Kohli, and S.G. Bharadwaj (2007), "Rethinking Customer Solutions: From Product Bundles to Relational Processes," Journal of Marketing, 71 (July), 1-17. Bem, D.J. (2002) "Writing the Empirical Journal Article" Gigerenzer, G. (1991), "From Tools to Theories: A Heuristic of Discovery in Cognitive Psychology," Psychological Review, 98 (April), 254-267. Zaltman, LeMasters, and Heffring, Theory Construction in Marketing, pp.71-96. (Chapter 4) (see moodle for copy) Dubin, R. (1969), Theory Building, revised ed. New York, NY: The Free Press, 159-174. (see moodle for

9

copy) Varadarajan (1996), “From the Editor: Reflections on Research and Publishing,”Journal of Marketing, 60 (October), 3-6.

3-Oct: Selected Marketing Theories

Howard, D.G., D. M. Savins, W. Howell, and J.K. Ryans, Jr. (1991), "The Evolution of Marketing Theory in the United States and Europe," European Journal of Marketing, 25 (2), 7-16. Resource Advantage theory (R-A theory) Hunt, Shelby D. (2012), “The Evolution of Resource-Advantage Theory: Six Events, Six Realizations, Six Contributions,” Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 4(1), 7- 29. Market Orientation Kohli, A K and BJ Jaworski (1990), “Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications,” Journal of Marketing, 54 (April), 1-18. Narver, J.C. and S.F. Slater (1990), “The Effects of Market Orientation on Business Profitability,” Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20-35. Jaworski, B. J. Kohli, A. K. (1993),.”Market Orientation: Antecedents and Consequences,” Journal of Marketing, 57(3), 53-70. Learning Orientation H. Sujan, B.A. Weitz and N. Kumar (1994), “Learning Orientation, Working Smart, and Effective Selling,” Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 39-52. Service Dominant Logic Vargo, S.L. and R.F. Lusch (2004), “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing,” Journal of Marketing, 68 (1), 1-17.

10-Oct: Selected Management Theories

Bacharach, S. (1989). “Organizational Theories,” Academy of Management Review, 14, 496-515. Dynamic Capabilities Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. & Shuen, A. (1997), “Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management,” Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.

Teece, D.J. (2007). “Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance,” Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.

Resource Based View of the Firm Wernerfelt, B. (1984). “A Resource-Based View of the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180. Barney, J. B. (1991). “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage,” Journal of Management, 17, 99-120. Barney, J. B. (1991). “The Resource Based View of Strategy: Origins, Implications, and Prospects.” Editor of Special Theory Forum in Journal of Management, 17, 97-211. Prahalad, C. K., and G. Hamel (1990). “The Core Competence of the Corporation.” Harvard Business Review, June, 79-91. Transaction Cost Economics Williamson, O.E. (1979), “Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations,”

10

Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233-261. Williamson, O.E. (1981). “The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach,” The American Journal of Sociology, 87(2): 233.

17-Oct: Selected Finance Theories

Capital Asset Pricing Model Fama, Eugene F. (1968). “Risk, Return and Equilibrium: Some Clarifying Comments,” Journal of Finance, 23(1), 29-40. Sharpe, W.F. (1964). “Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk,” Journal of Finance, 19 (3), 425-442. Institutional Theory DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,” American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. Meyer, J.W. and B. Rowan (1977), “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony,” The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. Aldrich, H.E. and C. Marlene Fiol (1994), “Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation,” The Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645-670.

24 Oct- Selected Info Systems Theories

Technology Diffusion T. S. Robertson and H. Gatignon (1986), "Competitive Effects on Technology Diffusion," Journal of Marketing, 50 (3), 1-12. Technology Acceptance Model Davis, F. D. (1989), “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., and Warshaw, P. R. (1989). “User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,” Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. Theory of Reasoned Action Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1973), “Attitudinal and Normative Variables as Predictors of Specific Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(1), 41-57. Motivation Model

31-Oct: Selected Other Theories

Agency Theory Eisenhardt, K.M. () Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review, Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74 Stewardship Theory J.H. Davis, F. D. Schoorman and L. Donaldson (1997). Toward a Stewardship Theory of Management,” The Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20-47. Stakeholder Theory Donaldson, T. and Preston, L. (1995) “The Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications,” Academy of Management Review 20, 65-91 Mitchell, R. K., and Agle, B. R. (1997), “Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts,” Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-

11

886. Prospect Theory Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky (1984), "Choices, Values, and Frames," American Psychologist, 39(4), 341-350. Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky (1979), "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," Econometrica, 4(2), 263-291. Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman (1981), "The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice," Science 211, 453-458. Organizational Culture Theory Pettigrew, A.M. (1979), “On Studying Organizational Cultures,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 570-581. Smircich, L.(1983), “Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 339-358. CSR Godfrey P.C.( 2005), “The Relationship Between Corporate Philanthropy and Shareholder Wealth: A Risk Management Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 30(4): 777-798. Godfrey, P.C., Merrill, C.B. and Hansen, Jared M. (2009), “The Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility and Shareholder Value: An Empirical Test of the Risk Management Hypothesis,” Strategic Management Journal, 30, 425-445.

7-Nov: Theory Boundaries: Moderators

Industry Competitiveness & Concentration Risk-Taking Centralization Commitment to Learning Trust Incremental vs. Radical Innovation Resource Exploration vs. Exploitation Etc

14-Nov: Reviewing as a method of improving theory writing

Singh, J. (2003) “A Reviewer's Gold”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 331-336. Ostrom, Amy L. (2003) “Achieving ‘Reviewer Readiness”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 337-340. Taylor, Shirley (2003) “Big R (Versus Little R) Reviewers: The Anonymous Coauthor”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 341-343. MacInnis, Debbie (2003) “Responsibilities of a Good Reviewer: Lessons Learned from Kindergarten”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 344-345. Nakata, Cheryl (2003) “A Philosophy of Reviewing: Taking Cues from Henry James”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31: 346-347.

21-Nov: Thanksgiving Holiday – University Closed

28-Nov: Theory Paper Presentations

12

No readings

5-Dec: Interviewing and the First Six Years

No readings

12-Dec: 11-1:30 Final Exam Slot (per University Calendar)

Final Theory Paper Due