Middle range theories of social systems

Abstract

The high abstractions found in social systems theory often defy falsification. As a result the stature of these abstractions is problematic. It is argued that several analytical biases provide false positive evidence supporting systems theory. False positives are likely when nouns exceed verbs in theoretical language, the analogy of thermostats is used indiscriminately, phenomenology of causation is ignored, need‐specific interdependencies are neglected, organizational routines are mistaken for feedback systems, and when a more coarse‐grained analysis is done of effects than of origins. Each of these biases leads to an overestimation of the abundance and tightness of couplings among events. Awareness of biases favoring false positives should result in interdependence being treated as a variable rather than a constant and to specification of conditions under which systems theory does and does not apply. With these changes, social systems theory would become a discrete confirmed theory that applies to limited ranges of data, consolidates segregated hypotheses, and is itself available for consolidation with other apparently discrete theories. Copyright © 1974 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.