Tweaking research question and hypotheses

I've been stuck over the past few days at the point in my thesis proposal where I lay out the questions/problems and propose my hypotheses. The problems I identified and phrased as questions seemed weak -- more descriptive than investigative: "In Beijing's view, these four geopolitical, regional, and bilateral factors affected Sino-Viet relations: Soviet influence on Vietnam, the Kampuchean conflict, the ethnic Chinese question, and territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Which was more important, and what were the connections between these factors?" This, of couse, had a knock-on effect on my hypotheses, which seemed to merely verify that the problems existed, rather than providing a resolution to a genuine question: "Certain factors were more important at certain times. There were correlations between some factors, but not all."

So I've been considering how I might change the problems/questions. This morning in the car I came up with a new approach. The problem: Research on Chinese foreign relations indicates the People's Republic of China consistently struggled to maintain a foreign policy independent of superpower interests after the death of Mao Zedong until the breakup of the Soviet Union. However, did Beijing view superpower interests in Vietnam or regional and bilateral issues as being more important in guiding Sino-Viet relations? My hypotheses: A computer-assisted content analysis of New China News Agency (NCNA) English wire service articles will show that in Beijing's view, regional and bilateral issues were far more important than Soviet or U.S. influence in Vietnam.

I'll try to work these into the draft proposal this weekend.