There are some metatheory building criteria that have particular relevance to the task of identifying underlying relationships between lenses. Internal consistency is one such criterion. Internal consistency means that defi nitions and relationships are applied across a conceptual framework in a reliable, consistent and logically coherent manner. Questions that guide this process include: Are relationships between lenses consistent and not contradictory? Do these relationships hold for all combinations of lenses? Do reductionist forms of lenses exist? High abstraction is another desirable quality for a metatheoretical system (Mowen & Voss, 2008). The abstraction level of a construct is its independence from situational and temporal particulars. When a theoretical system has a high abstraction level it has the capacity to “integrate many relationships and variables into a larger theory” (Wacker, 1998, p. 365). Metatheories are intended to do precisely this and so it is vital that overarching approaches should possess

a considerable level of abstraction. Uniqueness is another criterion that is used here to judge the adequacy of a lens. Uniqueness refers to the capacity for concepts to be independent and discernably distinct from one another. Clearly, if a lens is to provide some unique insight into a social event, it must disclose very distinctive views and generate explanations that are not shared by, or at least reducible to, other lenses. These criteria of internal consistency, abstractness and uniqueness guide the following explorations of lens relationships.