Social Science Inquiry, Sources, and Analysis
This domain tests how social scientists ask questions, select sources, evaluate evidence, and build explanations. Expect questions on primary and secondary sources, bias and point of view, corroboration, context, and interpreting maps, graphs, and timelines.
Source evaluation
- Primary sources come from the period or event being studied: letters, laws, artifacts, photographs, diaries, and oral testimony. Secondary sources interpret primary evidence, such as textbooks and journal articles.
- Every source has an origin, purpose, audience, and context. Bias does not make a source useless; it tells you how to use it.
- Corroboration means comparing sources to find agreement and disagreement. A single source rarely proves a broad claim.
Inquiry and evidence
- A useful inquiry moves from question to hypothesis to evidence to claim. Claims should be limited by the evidence and should explain reasoning.
- Data can mislead when the sample is small, the scale is unclear, or categories are defined loosely.
- Correlation means two things vary together; causation requires a mechanism and evidence that one thing produced the other.
Worked example
Two accounts describe a protest. A newspaper editorial calls the crowd disorderly; a police log records arrests but no injuries. A strong analysis asks who produced each source, when, and for what audience. It notes that the editorial is an interpretation and the log is a record, then corroborates with a third source. The conclusion should be limited: there was an arrest, but disorderly is a contested label, not a neutral fact.
Traps that cost marks
Assuming primary sources are always reliable; deciding a biased source is worthless; relying on one source; confusing correlation with causation; ignoring scale; and using present-day labels without checking period context.