PALESTINIAN SOCIETY - Fafo

opposed to the status categorization within them) cannot be judged,
they simply are accorded equal weight: A low score according to one
indicator, may be offset by a good situation in another. In other words,
we aUow good and bad situations to outbalance each other. . .
Independence, accumulation or compensation?
An important element in the analysis of soeial stratification is the way
in which different relative rankings are connected. Which of the four
present indicators are most closely related, thus contributing most
significantly to differentiation among Palestinian HHs? Does highstatus
education trans late irito high status occupatio�s, high housing
standards and high materia1.wealth? Which types.of combinations of
high and low status characteristics are most common?
. Three general distributive effects are normally considered in this
respect. I l First, no or rather weak connections between the various
indicators may be revealed, indicating a non-systematic distpbution
of goods and burdens. Secondly, if the distribution is systematic, good
or bad situations may either accumulate (those with unfavourable
conditions in one field will also experience a bad situation in the other
fields) or, third, they may imply compensation (a bad situation in one
field is offset by a good score in another). In the light of results in the
previous chapters we may expect a pattem of accumulation of good
and bad situations respectively. Table 8.2 presents the results of a
statistical analysis of covariation.
The coefficients give us two valuable pieces of information that
lend themselves to straightforward interpretation: First, the strength
of the association between the indicators tells us to what degree there
. are any systematic pattems in the relation between them.The measure
theoretically varies from +/- 0.0, indicating no covatiation, to +/- 1.0
indicating total conformity. Furthei;we may observe the direction of
the relation, i.e. how positive covariations indicate accumulation
(status consistency), while negative correlations denote compensation
(status inconsistency).
The table clearly demonstrates a Table 8.2 Thejour socioeconomic status indica­
systematic distribution of benefits tors: matrix oJ covariation (Pearson's rY. All
andburdensamongPalestinianHHs, coefficients significant at .OOJ level. N=8J 3
although the pattems are far from
totally conformal. The general trend
is one of accumulation or status consistency:
all four items co-vary pos-
226
Occupation
Consumer durables
Housing
Education
.50
.34
.21
Occupation Consumer
durables
.25
.19 .42