1. Critical Thinking Using the SSDBA and the TRD Edward Nelson and Elizabeth Nelson California State University Fresno Sociology

2. Social Science Data Base Archive (SSDBA) Collection of social science data including data from Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, Field Institute, Roper Center, and the Census Available to CSU http://artemis.calstatela.edu

3. Social Sciences Teaching Resources Depository (TRD) Collection of downloadable modules, data sets, exercises, and other resources for teaching Available to everyone http://www.csubak.edu/ssric/

4. Developing and Testing Hypotheses State the hypothesis Develop the argument or rationale that supports the hypothesis Create the dummy table Get the actual table Interpret the table and decide if it supports the hypothesis

5. State the Hypothesis A hypothesis states the expected relationship between two variables A hypothesis is testable –Definitions are not hypotheses –Moral imperatives are not hypotheses The hypothesis is the conclusion to the argument that supports it

6. Example of a Hypothesis Religion and Opinion on Pornography Laws Those who attend church frequently are more likely to think there should be laws against the distribution of pornography.

7. Argument to Support Hypothesis People who attend church frequently are more likely to have strong moral positions opposed to pornography and are, therefore, more likely to feel that society ought to make sure that pornography is not available to people regardless of their age.

8. Testing the Hypothesis To test this hypothesis we’ll use data from the 1994 and 1996 General Social Surveys. These surveys have been merged for this test. Data, codebook, and exercises are available on the Teaching Resources Depository-- http://www.cusbak.edu/ssric

9. Using the TRD To look at the exercise, go to the TRD website and click on Exercises. Look for RELG Exercise 3. To download the exercise, codebook, and data set, go to the Downloads part of the site and double click on what you want to download. If that doesn’t work, right click on it and choose “Save target as.”

10. Dummy Table

11. Actual Table

12. Interpretation of Table Those who attend church frequently are more likely to feel that pornography ought to be illegal for everyone (60% of those who attend often compared to 26% of those who seldom attend). Those who seldom attend church are more likely to feel pornography ought to be illegal for those under 18 (70% of those who attend infrequently compared to 38% of those who attend often).

13. Considering Other Variables We know there are other variables related to church attendance and feelings about pornography. For example, women are more likely to attend church than men and also more likely to feel pornography ought to be illegal. Let’s add sex into our analysis.

14. Sex and Church Attendance

15. Sex and Pornography Laws

16. Interpretation Women are considerably more likely to feel that pornography ought to be illegal for everyone regardless of age. Women are somewhat more likely to attend church frequently.

17. Adding a Third Variable Perhaps the reason that the more religious are more likely to feel that pornography ought to be illegal to everyone is that women are more religious than men and women are also more likely to feel that pornography ought to be illegal for everyone. Let’s check on this possibility.

18. Actual Table--Males Only

19. Actual Table--Females Only

20. Interpretation If the relationship had been due to sex, then the relationship between attendance and feelings about pornography laws would have disappeared when we held sex constant. However, the relationship did not disappear. Therefore, the relationship is not due to sex. It might, of course, be due to some other variable.

21. Conclusion The analysis supports our hypothesis that the religious are more likely to feel that pornography ought to be illegal for everyone regardless of age. This relationship is not due to sex. It is not spurious when we hold sex constant. However, it might be spurious when we hold some other variable constant. We can never prove causality. We can only make a causal connection more credible.