Answering the "So What?" Question

Finding a research question that answers the "so what?" question is one of the hardest parts of qualitative research. But that may be because what you think is your (narrowly framed) question is actually your answer to a much bigger question.

Let me explain…

Qualitative projects often get started because the researcher notices something interesting about the world. Let's say you notice that a kid you know developed an imaginary friend at the beginning of the pandemic.

Based on that observation, you might think: "Ooh! I want to do a project on kids and imaginary friends during the pandemic."

If someone asks you about your research question, there’s a good chance you’ll come up with a question about the observation you made. Essentially, looking inward instead of outward. Or asking a question about your case instead of asking what your case might be a case of.

So, ultimately, you might come up with a research question like: "How are kids using imaginary friends to cope with the pandemic?"

Now, that's certainly a question you could answer. But it's somewhat narrow. There's no clear link to theory/implications.

With that kind of narrow, question-about-the-case question, your end product will probably be a descriptive account of a few different ways that kids engage with imaginary friends. And description alone is useful. But, if your goal is to publish a paper or a book based on this project, you might have trouble finding a home for a purely descriptive account of a phenomenon like imaginary friends.

That’s why, if your advisor (or a reviewer) sees your research question, or reads a draft based on that question, they might ask you "so what?" Or, put differently, they might push you to "think bigger" or identify "what your case (kids and imaginary friends) is a case of."

What I'd say, meanwhile, is that what you've actually found isn't your question but one possible answer to a larger question. Something like: "How are kids coping with the pandemic?" Or, even bigger: "How do kids cope with social isolation?"

Those are big questions - the kind that have clear "so what" implications. They're also the kind of questions that have multiple possible answers. And one of those answers might be imaginary friends. But you might find other strategies kids are using to cope, as well.

Now, you might think: There's no way I can uncover all the ways kids cope with isolation! But you don't have to. You can make an important contribution by revealing a few or even one key strategy kids use that hasn't been discussed before. Like imaginary friends.

Basically, what I'm saying here is - if you're struggling to frame your research question, or if you're getting pushback because your question is "too narrow," you might actually have an answer and what you really need to find is the question that answer answers, instead.

…

For other advice on research, writing, and grad school more generally, check out my book, A Field Guide to Grad School, which is also available (for less than $10) as an ebook.

Revise and Resubmit

In academic writing, a request to “revise and resubmit” can generate both elation and exasperation. Elation in the sense that the paper hasn’t been rejected. And exasperation in the sense that there’s still more (and sometimes a lot more) work to be done.

In most cases, an R&R will come with a set of comments from reviewers and sometimes feedback from the editors, as well. Those comments, in turn, may be fairly brief, totaling only a few paragraphs, or they be may extensive, continuing on for pages and pages in sum. Those comments may also be helpful, with explicit (and not contradictory) recommendations for improving the paper, or they may be less helpful, offering either critiques without explicit recommendations for improvement or recommendations that contradict across reviews. And of course, those comments may be positive and kind, or they may be harsh and demeaning to you and/or your work.

If the feedback you get from reviewers is extensive or harsh or unhelpful, it’s easy to feel discouraged—to feel as though revising the paper presents an impossible task. Ultimately, though, it’s important not to ignore the reviewers’ comments as you work through revising your paper. Making a good-faith effort at addressing each of the reviewers’ concerns (or, in some cases, explaining clearly why you won’t or can’t follow a specific recommendation from a reviewer) can give you a better shot at getting the paper through to acceptance, or in some cases to another R&R.

I offer recommendations for responding to an R&R (or a second or third R&R) in A Field Guide to Grad School, but I figured it would also be helpful to share an examples of papers that went through a fairly extensive set of reviews, revisions, and resubmissions.

My hope is that, by sharing all the draft versions and reviews of these papers, I can give readers, especially grad student readers, a better sense of how the sausage is made. And it’s important to understand how messy and frustrating that process can be. Because it’s easy to look at a final, published piece of academic writing and feel discouraged if your own draft writing isn’t as clear or concise or hard-hitting. But that’s not the standard you should be judging your early drafts against. And it’s important to know that even papers that start off far from perfect can end up getting published in the end.

The first paper I’ll share, Coached for the Classroom: Parents’ Cultural Transmission and Children’s Reproduction of Educational Inequalities, was published in the American Sociological Review in 2014. Before that, though, it went through two R&Rs and then a received a “conditional accept” with a request for further (and fairly extensive) changes from the editors.

• Initial Submission

• Reviews of Initial Submission (R&R 1)

• Second Submission

• Reviews of Second Submission (R&R 2)

• Third Submission

• Conditional Accept

• Fourth and Final Submission

The second paper I’ll share is ‘I Need Help!’ Social Class and Children’s Help-Seeking in Elementary School, which was published in the American Sociological Review in 2011. This paper got an initial R&R and then was conditionally accepted after that.

• Initial Submission

• Reviews of Initial Submission (R&R)

• Second Submission

• Response Letter with Second Submission

• Conditional Accept

• Final Submission

• Response Letter with Final Submission