On the Utility of Robust and Resampling Procedures1

Abstract Kassab (1990) makes an important methodological contribution by urging the use of robust regression methods in the study of community economic impacts and by indicating the utility of the bootstrap in assessing standard errors in robust regression. By introducing the notion of a contaminating distribution, we reconcile differences between her claim that ordinary least squares (OLS) regression is biased when outliers are present and standard linear model theory that does not make assumptions about the shape of the residual distribution in proving OLS an unbiased estimator. The contaminating distribution provides a framework for rural sociologists to link their statistical assumptions to a substantive understanding of the phenomena being studied. We suggest an alternative regression estimation strategy that may be more robust than the technique she uses. We also discuss an approach to bootstrapping that is more appropriate for macro-level social indicator data than the one she describes. An appendix discusses the software available for implementing these methods.     

THE McMASTER FAMILY ASSESSMENT DEVICE: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY*

This paper reports a series of studies investigating the reliability and validity of the McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD). The results indicated that the FAD has: (a) adequate test-retest reliability, (b) low correlations with social desirability, (c) moderate correlations with other self-report measures of family functioning, and (d) differentiates significantly between clinician-rated healthy and unhealthy families. Cut-off scores for identifying healthy and unhealthy families also were developed which have adequate sensitivity and specificity. Additionally, the relationships between the FAD, Family Unit Inventory, and FACES-II suggests that the cohension and adaptability scales from the FACES-II have a linear relationship with health/pathology.     

On the momentum of population growth

If age-specific birth rates drop immediately to the level of bare replacement the ultimate stationary number of a population will be given by (9): $$\left( {{\textstyle{{b\mathop e\limits^ \bullet {}_0} \over {r\mu }}}} \right)\left( {\frac{{R_0 - 1}}{{R_0 }}} \right)$$ multiplied by the present number, where b is the birth rate, r the rate of increase, \(\mathop e\limits^ \bullet _0 \) the expectation of life, and R ₀ the Net Reproduction Rate, all before the drop in fertility, and μ the mean age of childbearing afterwards. This expression is derived in the first place for females on the stable assumption; extension to both sexes is provided, and comparison with real populations shows the numerical error to be small where fertility has not yet started to drop. The result (9) tells how the lower limit of the ultimate population depends on parameters of the existing population, and for values typical of underdeveloped countries works out to about 1. 6. If a delay of 15 years occurs before the drop of the birth rate to replacement the population will multiply by over 2. 5 before attaining stationarity. The ultimate population actually reached will be higher insofar as death rates continue to improve. If stability cannot be assumed the ultimate stationary population is provided by the more general expression (7), which is still easier to calculate than a detailed projection.     

On structure-dependent grammars: A reply to Mabry

The Analysis of Verbal Behavior - In a recent paper, Mabry (1993) examines various aspects of Skinner’s (1957) treatment of grammar, and he compares it with cognitivist approaches. Mabry...     

Whose rights are they anyway?: The supreme court and the rights of Juveniles

This article examines selected United States Supreme Court decisions from 1923 through the 1984 term of the Court. The selection, which includes Wisconsin v. Yoder, In re Gault, In re Winship, and Schall v. Martin, traces and illustrates the triangle of interest among parent, child, and state as parens patriae, when the issue raised is the interest of children. The focal question is: Have children been recognized as having their own individual Constitutional rights, or have their rights been merged with those of their parents and/or the state standing in the place of the parents?     

The potential of social indicators: Minimum conditions for impact at the national level as suggested by a study of the use of ‘social indicators’ 73

Empirical evidence is presented which suggests that the use of social indicators among upper level government officials in the United States is minimal at present. Further, the level of use is not likely to be increased by improved measurement procedures, aesthetically improved packaging, or more widespread dissemination of such information among persons who influence policy decisions. The power of such information can be expected to be no greater than that of ‘mere’ statistics unless deliberate effort is made to institutionalize the importance of social indicators into government operations in conjunction with policy planning, goal setting, and commitment to the use of indicators as a system of national evaluation of progress toward the achievement of societal objectives. Several recommendations are made to develop the potential of social indicators and to increase their creative and useful application in matters of public policy at the national level.     

Do expressive mothers have expressive children? The role of socialization in children's affect expression

The effects of maternal expressiveness and children's gender on children's nonverbal expressiveness were assessed in two settings. In the laboratory, 30 boys and 30 girls of kindergarten age were unobtrusively videotaped while talking about happy, sad, and fearful experiences and while experiencing three social situations designed to elicit happy, disappointed, and apprehensive feelings. Videotapes were rated for emotion expression, using global ratings and EMFACS codes. In school, teachers rated these children's expression of four discrete emotions. In both the laboratory and school settings children were more positively expressive than negatively so, and positive and negative expressiveness were unrelated. In the laboratory children's positive expressiveness was consistent across the three social situations, but negative expressiveness varied across affective context. In both settings, children of low-expressive mothers were more positively expressive than children of high-expressive mothers, who tended to be more negatively expressive than children of low-expressive mothers. The difference in negative expression appeared most striking for anger. Gender was not predictive of children's expressiveness in either setting