Equating concepts with variables erases the conceptual stage of measurement.

Evidence

“To equate concepts with variables also seems to be characteristic of the first sustained attempt in U.S. sociology to explore the process of theorizing, the so-called theory construction movement that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s. In Constructing social theories by Arthur Stinchcombe, concepts are equated with variables in an unproblematic manner. ‘A “variable” in science is a concept which can have various values, and which is defined in such a way that one can tell by means of observations which value it has in a particular occurrence’ (Stinchcombe 1968, 28–29, 38). The same tendency can also be found in Theoretical sociology: from verbal to mathematical formulations by Hubert Blalock which refers to ‘concepts or variables.’ This is similarly true for Blalock’s presidential address at ASA in 1978, which was devoted to ‘measurement and conceptualization problems’, and in which the author refers to what he calls ‘theoretical variable’ (Blalock 1979, 881). … There exists little discussion, in contrast, of the fact that the move from concept-to-variable-to indicator (1-2-3) is often reduced to a move from variable-to-indicator (2-3).” (Swedberg 2015, 12) 5. — Gary Goertz, Social Science Concepts and Measurement, 556

Categorization

• DEFINE: Names the specific act — treating a concept as a variable with values — that collapses the three-step concept-variable-indicator chain into two.
• XREF: Connects to the reader’s earlier notes on social capital as an ‘unanalyzed placeholder’ and on income distributions as claims-making discourse rather than measurement science.