What are the most "Theoretical" ASA Sections?

All of this year's JTS afterpanelists engage the central question of "what is theory" often reflecting that question through empirical observations about what we as scholars identify as theory in practice, and unpacking the assumptions that undergird those attributions. For example, Maggie Frye's essay examines why some sections think of themselves as more engaged with "theory" than others. Maggie draws on ASA section membership overlaps with the Theory Section for data, as an expression of self identification with "theory."

In this interactive feature we give you the opportunity engage the question from another angle: what are the ascriptive identifications for the extent to which other sections have a reputation for being "theoretical"?