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

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.

[1]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[2]  Susette M. Talarico,et al.  Policing styles: Notes on an empirical synthesis of Wilson and Muir , 1980 .

[3]  S S Stevens,et al.  On the Theory of Scales of Measurement. , 1946, Science.

[4]  Scott H. Decker,et al.  Police minority recruitment: A note on its effectiveness in improving black evaluations of the police , 1980 .

[5]  A. Blumstein.  Seriousness Weights in an Index of Crime , 1974 .

[6]  Curtis D. Hardyck,et al.  Weak Measurements vs. Strong Statistics: An Empirical Critique of S. S. Stevens' Proscriptions nn Statistics , 1966 .

[7]  Sanford Labovitz,et al.  Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics , 1967 .

[8]  Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Variables Revisited , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[9]  V. L. Senders,et al.  Measurement and statistics , 1958 .

[10]  S. S. Stevens.  Mathematics, measurement, and psychophysics. , 1951 .

[11]  Sanford Labovitz,et al.  The Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories , 1970 .

[12]  Edwin S. Johnson,et al.  Research methods in criminology and criminal justice , 1981 .

[13]  Sheldon Ekland-Olson,et al.  “REPEAT PLAYERS” IN A CRIMINAL COURT The Fate of their Clients , 1982 .

[14]  C. Kruttschnitt.  WOMEN, CRIME, AND DEPENDENCY An Application of the Theory of Law , 1982 .

[15]  Delos H. Kelly,et al.  SERIOUSNESS OF DELINQUENT BEHAVIOUR: AN ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE , 1970 .

[16]  Carol A. Saslow,et al.  Basic research methods , 1982 .

[17]  Johann Pfanzagl,et al.  Theory of measurement , 1970 .

[18]  Chava Nachmias,et al.  Research Methods in the Social Sciences , 1976 .

[19]  Frederic M. Lord,et al.  On the Statistical Treatment of Football Numbers. , 1953 .

[20]  S. S. Steivens.  Measurement, Statistics, and the Schemapiric View , 1968 .

[21]  S. Schweitzer,et al.  Comment on the Pearson R in Random Number and Precise Functional Scale Transformations , 1971 .

[22]  Richard A. Ball,et al.  Development of Basic Norm Violation , 1983 .

[23]  Brian Ellis,et al.  Basic Concepts of Measurement. , 1966 .

[24]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  A metric for the social consensus. , 1966, Science.

[25]  Marvin E. Wolfgang,et al.  The measurement of delinquency , 1965 .

[26]  Robert H. Somers,et al.  A new asymmetric measure of association for ordinal variables. , 1962 .

[27]  E. Borgatta.  My Student, the Purist: A Lament1 , 1967 .

[28]  Robert M. O’Brien.  Rank Order Versus Rank Category Measures of Continuous Variables , 1983 .

[29]  Paul Gray,et al.  A detective allocation model , 1976 .

[30]  J. Gaito.  Measurement scales and statistics: Resurgence of an old misconception. , 1980 .

[31]  Ted Chiricos,et al.  Deterrent and Experiential Effects: the Problem of Causal Order in Perceptual Deterrence Research , 1982 .

[32]  M. Donnelly,et al.  Experimental considerations concerning category and magnitude scaling. , 1967, The American journal of psychology.

[33]  Ernest W. Adams,et al.  A theory of appropriate statistics , 1965, Psychometrika.

[34]  Ted Chiricos,et al.  Perceived Risk and Deterrence: Methodological Artifacts in Perceptual Deterrence Research , 1982 .

[35]  Robert M. O'Brien,et al.  The Use of Pearson's with Ordinal Data , 1979 .

[36]  Frank Henry,et al.  Multivariate Analysis and Ordinal Data , 1982 .

[37]  Andrew Binder,et al.  Considerations of the place of assumptions in correlational analysis. , 1959 .

[38]  Joseph L. Zinnes,et al.  Theory and Methods of Scaling. , 1958 .

[39]  C. Alan Boneau.  A note on measurement scales and statistical tests. , 1961 .

[40]  Jae-On Kim,et al.  Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Variables , 1975, American Journal of Sociology.

[41]  N. Anderson.  Scales and statistics: parametric and nonparametric. , 1961, Psychological bulletin.

[42]  Henry R. Lesieur,et al.  REMEASURING DELINQUENCY: A REPLICALTION AND CRITIQUE , 1975 .

[43]  N. B. Heller,et al.  Applications of Crime Seriousness Information in Police Departments , 1973 .

[44]  D. Koenig.  The effects of criminal victimization and judicial or police contacts on public attitudes toward local police , 1980 .

[45]  K. Bollen,et al.  Pearson's R and Coarsely Categorized Measures , 1981 .

[46]  F. Hagan.  Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology , 1982 .

[47]  Earl R. Babbie,et al.  The practice of social research , 1969 .

[48]  Burke Cj,et al.  Additive scales and statistics. , 1953 .

[49]  T. Flanagan.  Discretion in the Prison Justice System , 1982 .

[50]  K. Spence,et al.  The logic of psychophysical measurement , 1944 .

[51]  G. N. G. Rose.  CONCERNING THE MEASUREMENT OF DELINQUENCY , 1966 .