Restrictions on statistics imposed by method of measurement: Some reality, much mythology

44Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Practically everyone who has been exposed to a course or a textbook covering research methods in the social sciences realizes that there are four scales of measurement widely referred to in the field: nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio. As a result of that exposure, he or she may be concerned about using appropriate statistics when a given scale is at hand. Some anxiety, for example, may result from the mere thought of using a t-test with ordinal data. This article discusses the origins and philosophical bases of arguments regarding scale-statistics relationships; points out misconceptions and fallacies in certain of these arguments; and emphasizes that in the overwhelming majority of cases in the social sciences, most particularly in criminology and criminal justice, researchers may use statistics without concern or anxiety regarding scale properties. © 1984.

References Powered by Scopus

Get full text
Get full text
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Binder, A. (1984). Restrictions on statistics imposed by method of measurement: Some reality, much mythology. Journal of Criminal Justice, 12(5), 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(84)90094-1

Readers over time

‘10‘11‘12‘13‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘2202468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 8

42%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

21%

Researcher 4

21%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

16%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 4

29%

Mathematics 4

29%

Computer Science 3

21%

Business, Management and Accounting 3

21%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0