Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Sampling Organizations and Groups of Unequal Sizes

Kish, Leslie·1965·American Sociological Review

Abstract

this model is taken as accurate, it leads to the conclusions that occupational and educational rank are negatively related to symptom level, that racial-ethnic rank is positively related to symptom level, and that all forms of sharp status inconsistency produce more or less equivalent increments in symptom level. The second alternative model, Model II, was based on the hypothesis that racialethnic status per se has no effect on symptom level. It included terms for the additive effects of occupation and education and terms for effects of sharp inconsistency, but not for additive racial-ethnic effects. Like Model I, this analysis leads to conclusions that educational and occupational rank are negatively related to symptom level and that sharp occupation-education inconsistencies increase symptom levels. Unlike the previous model, Model II indicates that sharp (and perhaps moderate) inconsistency between high ascribed status and low achieved status has a much greater impact on symptom level than the converse form of discrepancy. Of course, these two alternate models fall far short of exhausting the explanatory possibilities.22 But they do constitute two plausible hypotheses for further test. What are the grounds for choosing between them at the present time? Model I, involving all three status dimensions and four types of sharp inconsistency, accounts for somewhat more variation than Model II, at the cost of adding two terms to the prediction equation. We prefer Model II, however, because we find the assumption that inconsistency between high ascribed and low achieved status is especially likely to lead to a symptomization response, theoretically more palatable, for reasons explained in the earlier report,23 than the assumption that high racial-ethnic status is itself positively related to symptom level. A last conclusion is the the method of analysis used herein should be admirably suited to much sociological research, in which low levels of measurement and an interest in interaction are frequently combined.24

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2091346

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kish, L.
Venue
American Sociological Review
Published
1965-08
Volume
30
Issue
4
Pages
564
ISSN
0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2409248802
Cited by
293
References
0
FWCI
4.13
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

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.