Search

Chapter 11 of the book "The Social Work Student's Research Handbook," by Dominique Moyse Steinberg is presented. According to the chapter, plausible alternative explanations are hypothetical rival explanations to research findings. Most plausible alternative explanations are eliminated with the use of a control or comparison group while some are mitigated by using different but equivalent pretest and posttest instruments, the threat of some is reduced by carefully training researchers and participants.

The article investigates the sardonic visions of the two prominent social scientists of the twentieth century, Erving Goffman and Thorstein Veblen. When two individuals touch upon the same themes we commonly surmise that one must have influenced the other or if the two are roughly contemporaneous, to inquire whether cross-pollination occurred. Both men developed distinctive styles of presentation, often commented upon and considered a central defining feature of their work. Both employ sardonic humor and metaphoric tropes and were frequently labeled satiric or ironic. Their styles contribute to their arguments. The content of their writings on status symbols. Both Goffman and Veblen are deeply suspicious of the aesthetic standards of social élites. Both are fundamentally ironists and debunkers. Perhaps their most dramatic difference relates to their politics. Goffman is typically seen as a conservative or an apolitical liberal , whereas Veblen has a reputation as a radical. While not all the facts of the two lives are parallel, enough are to suggest the plausibility of the claim that their similar theories derive in part from similar life histories.