27.10.2014 Views

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The Foundations of Social <strong>Research</strong> 47<br />

When you assign the numeral 1 to men and 2 to women, all you are do<strong>in</strong>g is<br />

substitut<strong>in</strong>g one k<strong>in</strong>d of name for another. Call<strong>in</strong>g men 1 and women 2 does<br />

not make the variable quantitative. The number 2 happens to be twice as big<br />

as the number 1, but this fact is mean<strong>in</strong>gless with nom<strong>in</strong>al variables. You can’t<br />

add up all the 1s and 2s and calculate the ‘‘average sex’’ any more than you<br />

can add up all the telephone numbers <strong>in</strong> the Chicago phone book and get the<br />

average phone number.<br />

Assign<strong>in</strong>g numbers to th<strong>in</strong>gs makes it easier to do certa<strong>in</strong> k<strong>in</strong>ds of statistical<br />

analysis on qualitative data (more on this <strong>in</strong> chapter 17), but it doesn’t turn<br />

qualitative variables <strong>in</strong>to quantitative ones.<br />

Ord<strong>in</strong>al Variables<br />

Like nom<strong>in</strong>al-level variables, ord<strong>in</strong>al variables are generally exhaustive<br />

and mutually exclusive, but they have one additional property: Their values<br />

can be rank ordered. Any variable measured as high, medium, or low, like<br />

socioeconomic class, is ord<strong>in</strong>al. The three classes are, <strong>in</strong> theory, mutually<br />

exclusive and exhaustive. In addition, a person who is labeled ‘‘middle class’’<br />

is lower <strong>in</strong> the social class hierarchy than someone labeled ‘‘high class’’ and<br />

higher <strong>in</strong> the same hierarchy than someone labeled ‘‘lower class.’’ What ord<strong>in</strong>al<br />

variables do not tell us is how much more.<br />

Scales of op<strong>in</strong>ion—like the familiar ‘‘strongly agree,’’ ‘‘agree,’’ ‘‘neutral,’’<br />

‘‘disagree,’’ ‘‘strongly disagree’’ found on so many surveys—are ord<strong>in</strong>al measures.<br />

They measure an <strong>in</strong>ternal state, agreement, <strong>in</strong> terms of less and more,<br />

but not <strong>in</strong> terms of how much more.<br />

This is the most important characteristic of ord<strong>in</strong>al measures: There is no<br />

way to tell how far apart the attributes are from one another. A person who is<br />

middle class might be twice as wealthy and three times as educated as a person<br />

who is lower class. Or they might be three times as wealthy and four times as<br />

educated. A person who ‘‘agrees strongly’’ with a statement may agree twice<br />

as much as someone who says they ‘‘agree’’—or eight times as much, or half<br />

aga<strong>in</strong> as much. There is no way to tell.<br />

Interval and Ratio Variables<br />

Interval variables have all the properties of nom<strong>in</strong>al and ord<strong>in</strong>al variables.<br />

They are an exhaustive and mutually exclusive list of attributes, and the attributes<br />

have a rank-order structure. They have one additional property, as well:<br />

The distances between the attributes are mean<strong>in</strong>gful. Interval variables, then,<br />

<strong>in</strong>volve true quantitative measurement.<br />

The difference between 30C and 40C is the same 10 as the difference

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!