ABSTRACT
John Lofland (1970; 1976) in his overview of ethnographic research states that sociologists are too casual in their development of theoretical concepts. He concedes that they make use of “encompassing conceptions” such as impression management but do not delineate what he calls “mini-concepts” as micro regularities and the way they are interrelated so as to constitute what he says Merton (1957) calls “theories of the middle range.” Accordingly, we will attempt to demonstrate how we went about delineating the mini-concepts constituting impression management in the settings we studied and suggest a theoretical understanding of how these mini-concepts are related to each other in a logical fashion to constitute theory. The mini-concepts (e.g. repressed bubbling, subtle concealment, motive mannerisms, etc.) not only help elucidate behavior in exam-related contexts but, as shown below, are widely applicable to other contexts such as international border crossings, work settings, driver behavior, shopping, courtship, and even behavior in funeral homes. When we are mindful of the trans-situational properties of concepts (mini-or otherwise) they become, as Prus asserts, “like ‘magic carpets’ or ‘open sesames’ … [enabling] researchers to [move] quickly, easily, and productively from one setting to another” (1994: 395).
