Guide to Reading Non-Textbook Texts
\nSociology
\nUniversity of Hawai\u2018i, M\u00afanoa
\nThe articles, book chapters, and primary sources assigned in this class are not text books and should not be read like textbooks. A textbook is concentrated knowledge con densed into a short amount of text for maximum absorption. It often takes away complexity
\nand the messy details of how this knowledge was collected, or the broader literature in which
\nthis knowledge is situated and the debates surrounding our understanding of reality. A text book also takes away some of the difficult work of reading comprehension because everything
\nyou read is important: The words are in bold and there are bullet points to help identify the
\nkey facts\/terms\/points. There is also little repetition in a textbook, other than the chapter
\nsummaries or the glossary. Finally, there is rarely an argument that you have to identify.
\nConsequently, taking notes on a textbook chapter is very different than taking notes
\nfor a general academic book or scholarly article. Textbook notes might be almost as long as
\nthe reading itself. Each paragraph in a textbook usually has something important to say, so
\nyou might have a sentence for each paragraph. By contrast, articles and book chapters are
\nunevenly important: the introduction and conclusion might be the most important parts,
\nwhile discussions of data and methods might be less useful. They tend to be somewhat
\nrepetitive to make sure you get the main point they make. They sometimes present quanti tative data analyses or they use examples to support their main argument. Ultimately, you
\ncan summarize an article or book chapter in 1-2 paragraphs if you just want to focus on the
\nkey points. This can be liberating\u2014it\u2019s not an excuse to zone out while you are reading (if
\nthat happens, you need to reread what you were mindlessly reading), but it does mean that
\nnot everything you read is equally important. It\u2019s up to you to identify the important parts.
\nThis guide is intended to help you through that process, since it is a good skill to have and
\none you will likely need to develop for this course.
\n1 Background Elements to Identify Before or As You Read
\nThese factors help you to understand what you are reading and how to approach it, but you
\nneed not take detailed notes on these. In fact, you can summarize each of these with just a
\nfew words each: e.g., Date: 1988, Kind of Text: research article, Tone: neutral\/academic.
\n1.1 Date of Publication
\nWhen was the text written? This is important because some material may be outdated or it
\nmay be considered a \u201cclassic\u201d because it was an early statement and spawned a literature.
\n(People also wrote differently in the 1940s through the 1970s than they did\/do in the 1980s
\n1
\nthrough the 2010s. It could be denser back then. Sometimes they also used (insulting)
\nlanguage we wouldn\u2019t use today.) Alternatively, it may be a relatively new piece of research
\ndetailing something no one has discussed, in which case, the author and their intended readers
\nare very excited about whatever is new or different about this piece and its contribution to
\nthe texts that came before. There are also pieces in the middle that make interesting points,
\nbut are not pathbreaking research. The status of what you are reading gives you a hint
\nabout why you are reading it and what to take away. The publication date will also give
\nyou a sense of what the author means by \u201ccontemporary.\u201d It is also important to consider
\nwhat period the work was written in as standards of research and the amount of available
\nresearch change over time (there is so much more now), while theories that are considered
\nvogue also change.
\n1.2 Kind of Text
\nWe will read a variety of texts (e.g., primary source v. secondary source; scholarly journal ar ticle, book, newspaper, governmental report) in this course and it\u2019s important to keep in mind
\nwhat you are reading. Most often, we will read scholarly texts. Scholarly journal articles
\nand books written by academics are read for their theoretical or empirical contribution\u2014
\nthey either have an interesting way of understanding some phenomenon and\/or they offer
\nevidence of some phenomenon, often using jargon.
\nFirst, you need to determine if it is an article or a book chapter. If it\u2019s a chapter in
\na book, it is part of a larger argument the author is making. Introduction chapters tend
\nto lay out the overall argument and some background materials, and later chapters tend
\nto offer evidence in support of that argument. Look at the chapter number to get a sense
\nabout whether this is an overview or a specific sub-argument. Research articles or journal
\narticles are published by academics\u2014professors at universities (most often)\u2014writing for
\nother academics and trying to answer a specific question. In both cases, the author is trying
\nto contribute something meaningful to an on-going discussion or debate \u201cin the literature\u201d
\n(between scholars\/academics) to help us better understand some part of our world.
\nOften, the author will address the state of literature, discussing what other scholars
\nhave found in previous studies or what their main theories have suggested. This is often
\nstated in the introduction and later more in depth in a section helpfully labeled \u201cLiterature
\nReview\u201d or \u201cTheoretical Framework\u201d (or sometimes they use the name of the theory or
\nsub-literature to label the section, so you might see something like \u201cThe Neo-Institutional
\nFramework\u201d). This information tells you what the author knew when they started their
\nresearch and why they chose the particular approach they did\u2014usually they try to follow
\nwhat others have done before them, but they also try to do this somewhat differently so they
\ncan push our state of knowledge forward, such as testing a theory on a different dataset or a
\ndifferent place\/time\/population, or think about how a theory applies to a phenomena people
\nhaven\u2019t studied before using that framework. Scholarly journal articles and book chapters
\noften have a lot of jargon in them and they also tend to use big vocabulary words. It can
\nsometimes be difficult to distinguish between these because often the jargon terms are made
\nup of the big vocabulary words, but have a somewhat different, more specific definition than
\nyou\u2019ll find in the dictionary. In general, you\u2019ll want to look any words you don\u2019t know.
\nHowever, words that the author tends to repeat a lot or actively defines in the text are
\ntypically pretty important and you want to keep track of these.
\nLess often, we will read primary sources. Primary sources (e.g., newspapers, govern 2
\nment reports, books or articles written in a historical period) give you a first-hand account
\nof something by a participant in the process (frequently used in history). These might be
\nmore detailed than scholarly articles; they also might assume a different set of knowledge,
\nespecially if they are historical. Their purpose will be more varied than scholarly articles
\nwritten for an academic audience\u2014is it someone\u2019s diary, a letter, an official report, is it trying
\nto change someone\u2019s mind, is it just describing something that happened in a semi-neutral
\nway?
\nMaterial is written and read for different reasons. We will not always read a text
\nfor the reason it was written (we will read historical documents to understand what was
\ngoing on at the time or to better understand some aspect of society at that time), but it\u2019s
\nimportant to remember why the author is writing and for whom they are writing.
\n1.3 Author\u2019s Tone
\nThis affects how much you should trust the author and their work. Are they an academic,
\nan activist, a novice, a journalist? (One\u2019s status as any of these things does not immediately
\ngrant or remove credibility, but it\u2019s something you need to identify.) Are they writing to a
\nparticular audience (other than other academics)? Do they have an agenda or other bias?
\nThis can be a bit tricky to identify, particular if the person has a different world view than
\nyou have or is saying something you don\u2019t like.
\nWhen evaluating an author\u2019s tone, students often have difficulty with this point:
\nwhat is the scholar\u2019s \u201copinion\u201d and what is their \u201cargument\u201d (or thesis). For the most part,
\nscholars don\u2019t write opinions. Opinions can be informed or uninformed, but generally they
\nare about what one believes. Social science scholarship is not about what one believes but
\nwhat one can learn from data or evidence. For example, whether or not I think the death
\npenalty is morally right (and it\u2019s pretty hard to offer evidence about what\u2019s right and wrong),
\nI can evaluate whether or not the death penalty deters\u2014that is, prevents crime by scaring
\npeople. I may or may not think it is morally right to execute people in order to deter others
\n(maybe I think retribution is the only moral justification or maybe I think we should not use
\npeople in this utilitarian way or maybe I think deterrence is a good idea), but I can evaluate
\nwhether or not deterrence works. If I can show executing people prevents crime, this is not
\nmy opinion\u2014it\u2019s what I\u2019m conveying based on evidence. If I think deterrence is a morally
\nbankrupt reason for executing people, that\u2019s my opinion\u2014I can\u2019t really give evidence for
\nthat.
\nWhile scholars do seek to present an argument about a specific topic, this argument
\nis usually based on an analysis of the data rather than their personal opinion. Most scholars
\ntry to write in a way that shows they don\u2019t really care which way the data come out (whether
\ntheir theory is confirmed or denied). Of course, we do hope that our expectations are correct
\nand that we aren\u2019t too far off, and we often do have policy preferences, but most social
\nscientists aspire to not let their personal preferences affect their writing (though they might
\naffect scholars\u2019 topics of interest).
\nSome scholars, however, will set out to \u201cprove\u201d something\u2014this in itself is kind of
\nmistaken because you cannot prove something, but you can disprove it. Usually, this hap pens where a scholar is making a normative rather than an empirical point: again, normative
\npoints are morality claims or value judgments, sometimes phrased as should statements (we
\nshould do it this way). Empirical statements are based on evidence rather than opinion.
\n(Policy recommendations are usually empirical claims that do have a \u201cshould\u201d component:
\n3
\nthey are normative in the sense that there is something they morally support or assume is
\ngood: efficiency, cost-effectiveness, humane treatment, crime prevention, etc. That is, they
\nhave some moral\/normative goal, but they empirically (systematically, with evidence) deter mine how to achieve that goal. In some fields (e.g., law, philosophy), normative statements
\nare encouraged; in our field and our related fields (criminology, sociology, political science,
\nsocio-legal studies, economics, history), be wary of scholars who determine their conclusions
\nbefore fully analyzing the data or selectively choose their evidence to advantage their argu ment. (In your own writing, you of course want to deploy examples that support your thesis,
\nbut do address counter-examples or pieces of evidence that might hurt your argument and
\ntalk about why it doesn\u2019t fit. This is what good scholars do.)
\nThere is an important caveat: sometimes scholars (especially) think they are writing
\nin a neutral manner, but they are not. In fact, a growing number of scholars recognize
\nthat it is impossible to be neutral and that what we count as neutral is itself a reflection
\nof power dynamics and privilege (usually the dominant group in society gets to say what
\nis neutral and whatever they don\u2019t like is biased). Essentially, to some extent our world
\nview is always present. When you really understand this statement, it\u2019s a bit like seeing the
\nMatrix for the first time, and it can take some time to wrap your head around. But there is a
\ndifference between this relatively subtle point and a more transparent version where someone
\nreally clearly has an ax to grind. That doesn\u2019t mean they aren\u2019t making an important and
\nvaluable point, but it should give us pause to evaluate their work (some people would argue
\nthat people who are very open about their politics when writing are actually more honest
\nthan people who pretend to be neutral and thus hide their politics that still might influence
\ntheir writing). I\u2019m also trying to highlight the difference between biased and neutral in a
\nrelatively simple way because sometimes people read all academic work as biased, especially
\nif they don\u2019t like the findings. But usually they are using biased in a different way than this
\nmore subtle Matrix-like point. Basically, there is a difference between trying to be neutral
\nand thinking you can 100% succeed, trying to be neutral but recognizing your own biases
\n(that everyone has) and therefore being honest about them, and giving up on any effort to
\nbe neutral.
\n2 Key Elements to Take Notes On
\nUltimately, you should take as many notes as necessary to help you understand the reading.
\nIf that means fully outlining the article or chapter, summarizing the key points of each
\nsection and excerpting key quotations, then do that. However, for the purposes of this class,
\nwe will focus on the article or chapter\u2019s key elements. If you have a difficult time taking notes
\non these elements, and you do not understand the article, then a more comprehensive note taking strategy is necessary, but the end goal should be to understand these key elements.
\nSo in reality, you probably need fewer notes than you think you do\u2014too often, students take
\na lot of notes when really you only need to be able to answer a few questions about the
\nreading.
\n2.1 Research Question
\nWhat question is the author attempting to answer? Why are they doing this project (what
\ndo they seek to learn)? Is there an overall puzzle they are trying to solve? Some examples
\ninclude: Why did executions decline throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
\n4
\nin England? Why did prisons emerge in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries?
\nWhy did supermax prisons spread so rapidly across the United States? Where did supermax
\nprisons come from? Why did rehabilitation become less popular in the 1970s? What was
\nthe effect of California\u2019s Three Strikes Law on the crime rate? Why did voters support the
\nThree Strikes Law? What do people understand as procedural fairness? How do people
\nmake sense of harms done to them? What is the role of race in court proceedings? These
\nquestions won\u2019t always be stated explicitly\u2014nor will they always be written as a question,
\nwith a question mark. Sometimes you have to infer the question.
\nThere are some articles that don\u2019t really have a research question but instead are
\ntrying to make a larger point\u2014these are usually critical in some way. For an example,
\nsee my article criticizing how some scholars describe some prisoner behaviors as resistance
\nwithout knowing the prisoners\u2019 motivations (here)\u2014reading the first section is sufficient to
\nillustrate the point.
\n2.2 Thesis and Key Findings
\nWhat does the author argue? What is their main point? What should you take away
\nfrom this text? Or, what does the author expect to be the case? Here we are talking
\nabout a major argument, not subsidiary points. What is the overarching explanation for a
\nphenomenon? The thesis often answers the research question or at least some part of it. The
\nthesis is typically stated at the beginning, in the Introduction, and restated at the end, in
\nthe Conclusion or Discussion sections. However, the thesis is often based on their analyses
\nof the data\u2014as noted above, the thesis is not usually something someone determines before
\nthey examine the evidence. Much of the text will support this overall thesis\u2014there are often
\nsub-arguments or different analyses that lead to this general conclusion.
\nIn some cases, there will not be a clear thesis or it will be a very general, broad
\nstatement. Almost all journal articles will have a central thesis, even if they don\u2019t have a
\nclearly stated research question.
\nTheses can also be fairly abstract or otherwise written in a way that doesn\u2019t really
\nsink in unless you have some examples to go with it. In addition to identifying the author\u2019s
\nmain argument, keep track of some key points the author makes about their data. Authors
\nwill usually have a lot to say, so focus on (1) the overall picture or main argument (thesis)
\nand (2) several examples that illustrate the thesis. You will want to have 1-2 sentences
\ndescribing the author\u2019s main thesis as well as 1-2 sentences for two to three main points
\n(each) the author uses to illustrate or support their thesis (or which they base the thesis on).
\nThese will sometimes overlap with your key terms section.
\n2.3 Key Terms
\nUsually, scholars will create jargon words, or use the jargon words that have become standard
\nin their field. They usually define these and offer examples of them\u2014sometimes the whole
\npaper is intended to offer a key example to illustrate a key concept. These key terms are
\nimportant. You can distinguish key terms by background concepts because they will use
\nthese key terms repeatedly throughout the text. You should also keep track of key people,
\nkey events, key places\/things. Importantly, these key terms (people, events, places, things)
\nare not important for the sake of memorizing who or what they are. Instead, authors are
\nvery selective about what key things they discuss and use them for a larger purpose. Ask
\n5
\nyourself: Are they an example of something? Were they the first in a line of developments,
\nand they started that development? Does it illustrate a concept? If so, how? Basically,
\nwhy is the author discussing this thing? Why is it important for the author? In a standard
\nscholarly journal article, you will see 1-3 key terms. In any text that is describing a period
\nof time, you will see a lot of examples; while not all of them will be key terms, there will
\nbe more key terms, but you should still distinguish between the main key term (usually a
\nconcept) and supporting key terms like events, people, places, and things that illustrate a
\nkey concept or a key argument.
\n2.4 Data and Methodology
\nIt is important to understand how the author comes to their conclusions. We will rarely read
\na text in which someone simply marks an argument that they support with logic. Instead,
\nauthors often deploy some sort of evidence (data) that they have systematically gathered
\n(through a method).
\nAsk yourself what kind of data the author is relying on (e.g., ethnographic notes,
\nquantitative dataset or numbers, historical\/archival texts). How did they collect this data?
\nWere they systematic in how they collected their data\u2014did they leave something important
\nout? Are they performing a random sample of people, did they focus on important people,
\ndid they talk to people they could find? If they perform a case study\u2014examining one entity
\n(one prison, one state, one police department, one city) in depth\u2014why did they select that
\ncase? Is it a trend setter? (California, New York, and Pennsylvania are often chosen for
\nthese reasons.) Is it an outlier? (Texas, Arizona, and Florida are sometimes chosen for these
\nreasons.) Is it a typical\/representative case?
\nNext, what was the author\u2019s method? How did they analyze the data at hand? Usu ally, the type of data informs the method. Qualitative data (texts, interviews) tend to
\nrequire qualitative methods (content analysis, interpretative analyses). Quantitative data
\n(datasets, large surveys that produce them, interviews when they are numerous enough)
\nare often analyzed quantitatively\u2014through regression analyses and other sorts of analyses
\nthat require a computer program to solve high-level equations. Sometimes, scholars use
\nboth types of data and both methods, and sometimes they use typically quantitative meth ods on qualitative data when they have enough of it. Other scholars are less clear about
\ntheir methods\u2014they tend to look at a lot of qualitative data\u2014newspaper articles, big court
\ncases, major laws\u2014and quantitative data\u2014like prison rates and execution rates\u2014and try to
\nexplain it without using a common method like content analysis, ethnography, participant
\nobservation, or regression\/quantitative analysis. In some cases, this is a sign of a lack of
\nrigor (bad research); in other cases, as long as they are systematic about how they collected
\nand analyzed their data, they are being more like an historian (historians don\u2019t like to talk
\nabout their methods).
\nUnderstanding the author\u2019s data and method helps us understand how the author
\ncame to the conclusion they did. Data and method are like the tools the author used to
\ncreate their product. This can be summarized very briefly in your reading notes.
\n2.5 Hypotheses
\nSometimes, the author offers hypotheses that they use to test a larger theory. Usually these
\nare discussed before the data\/methods section, but after the theory\/theoretical framework
\n6
\nsection in an article, and they are typically stated quite clearly. We will not read many
\narticles that do this (they are more common in texts that use quantitative analyses), but it
\nis worth keeping in mind.
\n2.6 Your Critique or Concerns
\nIs there anything wrong with the logic of the argument? Do the data (or findings) support
\nthe conclusion or argument? Are there counterexamples you can think of? Overall, do you
\nbelieve what the author is saying? Why or why not? This can be a brief sentence (\u201cI find
\nthis work compelling.\u201d) or several paragraphs if you are so inclined.
\n3 Other Notes
\nSection 2 described really important take-aways from a given text. For a given article, you
\nshould be able to summarize the main point(s) using notes on these Key Elements. However,
\nthese are the most important to remember and to keep in mind, but they are not the only
\nimportant items to take notes on. Indeed, the Key Elements\/summary items are things that
\nyou should review for the exams. However, for a given text, you will likely benefit from
\ntaking additional notes of some kind, which will help you to understand a text, be more
\nprepared for lecture, or better recall the article if you need to go back to it later.
\nDifferent people have different styles of taking notes, and people may even change
\nhow they take notes over time or across types of text. Some texts are relatively easy to
\nsummarize briefly, others are more abstract and require a lot of highlighting and additional
\nnote-taking. Generally speaking, highlighting a text is a good idea\u2014underlining, using a
\nhighlighter, making notations in the margins. These can be made digitally or on the printed
\nout text\u2014but remember that you need not print out the texts for this class. If you have
\nan iPad, the app iAnnotate works well for highlighting and note taking. On your computer,
\ncertain versions of Adobe (Mac or PC) or Preview (Mac) let you highlight the text.
\nMy personal strategy: Regardless of the text, I always highlight and\/or make notations
\nin the margins. If something is particularly interesting, I put a star next to it. If the author
\nmakes a particularly important point, I write a check mark next to it. If the author defines
\nan important concept, I write, \u201cdefn\u201d in the margin. In addition to these, I usually underline
\nor highlight (when I\u2019m reading something on my computer) or put a vertical line along the
\nmargin next to important text and underline really important sentences. Depending on
\nthe text, I also take notes separately\u2014sometimes in the margins, sometimes on a separate
\npiece of paper (or an index card or a composition book). Sometimes, my notes are just
\nthe summary and I can go back and read through the highlighted sections if I want more
\ninformation. Other times, I take more detailed notes\u2014the more interesting or dense a text,
\nthe more notes I make. Sometimes I find it useful to record the subject headings the author
\nuses and then take my notes within those subject headings. As much as possible, I try to
\nrephrase authors\u2019 points in my own words\u2014usually I can summarize better this way and save
\nmyself from too much writing\/typing\u2014but I will also record really important statements in
\nthe author\u2019s own words if it\u2019s a very complex or extremely well-written statement.
\n7
\n4 What if you are completely lost?
\nRemember: It\u2019s okay if you do not understand 100% of the assigned text. It is often dense
\nand abstract material. Additionally, you will not be asked about or quizzed or tested on
\neverything; instead, we\u2019ll mostly focus on Big Picture material. A lot of the readings will
\nmake more sense during or after lecture, and if they don\u2019t, come in to office hours. The
\nimportant part of all of this is that you get better at reading these materials over time
\n(which will happen as long as you stick with it and practice).
\nIn the mean time, what do you do when you come across sentences, paragraphs, or
\nwhole sections of an article or book chapter that don\u2019t make sense? Put a question mark
\nnext to the sentence, paragraph, or section, and keep going. Sometimes an author will
\nwrite something in a convoluted fashion, but when you see the concrete example or hear
\nthe convoluted thing described in slightly different language elsewhere in the reading, it will
\nmake more sense. So don\u2019t stop and stare at the words on the page trying to decipher their
\nmeaning; rather, keep going, and then come back and look at it once you\u2019ve read the rest
\nof the article. Hopefully then it will make sense. But even then, it\u2019s okay if it doesn\u2019t: you
\nstill have lecture and office hours to figure it out.
\nWhat if you find yourself struggling with the whole article or chapter? Step back and
\nfocus on identifying the most general aspects of the article: What was the article about? (a)
\nWhat thing was the focus? Substantively speaking, was it an article about prisons, crime
\ntrends, a weather station, a bunch of mixed organizations? (b) What were these things
\ndoing\u2014why are we focusing on them? Were the prisons emerging as a new development,
\nwere they responding to some change? Were the crime trends affected by some factor? Were
\nthe employees in the weather station affecting predictions? Were organizations responding
\nin various or related ways to some new law? Try to focus on the most concrete parts of
\nthe article and figure out why they matter. From there, you should be able to identify
\nthe research question and thesis\u2014it should have something to do with the main things the
\narticle is about and what they are doing. After that, think about smaller concrete details as
\nexamples of larger arguments. When you start to get lost, ask yourself how this relates to
\nthe main point of the text.
\n8
\nReading Notes Template
\nLast Name of Author(s)
\nDate\/Year of Publication
\nText Title
\n*Note: This is not the name of the journal that an article is published in.
\nKind of Text \u2013 Check All that Apply
\n Primary Source
\n Newspaper Article
\n Government Report
\n Scholarly Journal Article
\n Law Review Article
\n Other Type of Article
\n Academic Book Chapter
\n Other Book Chapter
\n Other
\nAuthor\u2019s Tone
\n Empirical\/Neutral
\n Normative\/Biased
\n Policy Recommendation
\n Other
\nData and Method \u2013 Check All that Apply
\n Ethnographic\/Participant Observation
\n Interview
\n Content Analysis
\n Historical\/Archival Records
\n Historical Narrative
\n Unclear
\n Survey Data
\n Census Data
\n Regression or Other High-Level Statistical,
\nComputer-based Analysis
\n Trends, Averages, Counts, or Basic De scriptive Statistics
\n Other
\nWhen\/Where does the study take place? That is, when\/where did the data
\ncome from?
\nDecade or century:
\nLocation\/setting:
\n9
\nResearch Question (1-2 Sentences)
\nThesis (1-2 Sentences + 2-3 Supporting Arguments\/Examples)
\nKey Concepts\/Terms\/Examples
\nCritique (1 or More Sentences)
\nOther Notes
\n10<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Guide to Reading Non-Textbook Texts Sociology University of Hawai\u2018i, M\u00afanoa The articles, book chapters, and primary sources assigned in this class are not text books and should not be read\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6912,6910,6914,6909,6913,6915,6911,1391],"tags":[6919,6185,116,18,6917,636,6918,6921,644,645,6916,6920],"class_list":["post-48170","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-essay-generator-free","category-type-my-essay-for-me-free","category-website-that-writes-essays-for-you","category-write-essays-online-for-free","category-write-my-essay-for-me-for-free","category-write-my-essay-for-me-online","category-write-my-essay-free","category-write-my-essay-online-free","tag-assessment-task-assignment-help","tag-assignment-help-uk","tag-best-essay-writing-service","tag-dissertation-help","tag-essay-typer","tag-essay-writer","tag-free-essay","tag-write-for-me","tag-write-my-essay-for-me-cheap","tag-write-my-essay-for-me-tik-tok","tag-write-my-essay-online-free","tag-write-my-essay-online-reviews"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48170","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48170"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48170\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48170"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48170"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.essaybishops.com\/essays\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48170"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}