The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
1. Ecometrics: Toward a Science of Assessing Ecological Settings, with Application to the Systematic Social Observation of Neighborhoods
Abstract
This paper considers the quantitative assessment of ecological settings such as neighborhoods and schools. Available administrative data typically provide useful but limited information on such settings. We demonstrate how more complete information can be reliably obtained from surveys and observational studies. Survey-based assessments are constructed by aggregating over multiple item responses of multiple informants within each setting. Item and rater inconsistency produce uncertainty about the setting being assessed, with definite implications for research design. Observation-based assessments also have a multilevel error structure. The paper describes measures constructed from interviews, direct observations, and videotapes of Chicago neighborhoods and illustrates an “ecometric” analysis—a study of bias and random error in neighborhood assessments. Using the observation data as an illustrative example, we present a three-level hierarchical statistical model that identifies sources of error in aggregating across items within face-blocks and in aggregating across face-blocks to larger geographic units such as census tracts. Convergent and divergent validity are evaluated by studying associations between the observational measures and theoretically related measures obtained from the U.S. Census, and a citywide survey of neighborhood residents
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Community Structure and Crime: Testing Social-Disorganization Theory
Sampson, R. J., & Groves, W. B. (1989) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/229068 · Cited by 4,392
Self-citation
Cited by
Racial Residential Segregation: A Fundamental Cause of Racial Disparities in Health
Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (2001) · Public Health Reports · doi:10.1093/phr/116.5.404 · Cited by 3,153
Diez Roux, A. V., & Mair, C. (2010) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05333.x · Cited by 2,774
Systematic Social Observation of Public Spaces: A New Look at Disorder in Urban Neighborhoods
Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1999) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/210356 · Cited by 2,485
Self-citationThe disaggregation of within-person and between-person effects in longitudinal models of change
Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2011) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100356 · Cited by 2,056
NEIGHBORHOOD INEQUALITY, COLLECTIVE EFFICACY, AND THE SPATIAL DYNAMICS OF URBAN VIOLENCE*
MORENOFF, J. D., SAMPSON, R. J., & RAUDENBUSH, S. W. (2001) · Criminology · doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00932.x · Cited by 1,874
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Raudenbush, S. W., & Sampson, R. J.
- Venue
- Sociological Methodology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-08
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-41
- ISSN
- 0081-1750 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9531
- OpenAlex
- W1998489119
- Cited by
- 1,087
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: 1. Ecometrics: Toward a Science of Assessing Ecological Settings, with Application to the Systematic Social Observation of Neighborhoods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/0081-1750.00059
- The paper
- Raudenbush, S. W., & Sampson, R. J. (1999). 1. Ecometrics: Toward a Science of Assessing Ecological Settings, with Application to the Systematic Social Observation of Neighborhoods. Sociological Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1111/0081-1750.00059
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.