The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics
Abstract
Several arguments are presented supporting the more extensive use of parametric statistics. These arguments are concerned with (1) the insensitivity of ordinal and other nonparametric techniques, (2) the small error that results from assigning numbers to ordinal data and then treating the categories as if they conform to an interval scale, (3) tests of statistical robustness, and (4) the power-efficiency of tests. The utility of assigning numbers or scoring systems to ordinal data and then using intervally-based statistics is supported in several ways. In addition, it is demonstrated that the linear scoring system results in a small amount of error no matter what the “true” scoring system may be. However, the assignment of any scoring system must be consistent with the monotonic function.
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
Cited by
How to analyze Likert and other rating scale data
Harpe, S. E. (2015) · Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2015.08.001 · Cited by 874
The Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories
Labovitz, S. (2017) · Scaling · doi:10.4324/9781315128948-36 · Cited by 508
Self-citationMulti-response permutation procedures for a priori classifications
Mielke, P. W., Berry, K. J., & Johnson, E. S. (1976) · Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods · doi:10.1080/03610927608827451 · Cited by 310
Roof, W. C. (1974) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225851 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Labovitz, S.
- Venue
- Social Forces
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1967-12-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 151-160
- ISSN
- 0037-7732 (ISSN-L)
- 1534-7605
- OpenAlex
- W2070888104
- Cited by
- 356
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.72
- 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: Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2574595
- The paper
- Labovitz, S. (1967). Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics. Social Forces. https://doi.org/10.2307/2574595
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.
