Edward W. Lehman

Some Dangers in "Valid" Social Measurement

This paper is a preliminary statement on the dysfunctions that social measurement may have for societal planning. Three problem areas associated with questions of internal validity are examined. The most general one is the area of fractional measurement, which concerns dysfunctions stemming from lack of coincidence between a social concept and its operational definition. Also examined are problems of indirect measurement and problems of formalistic-aggregative measurement of collective attributes. The area of indirect measurement concerns potential negative consequences of using data collected originally for other purposes as measures of social concepts. The area of formalistic-aggregative measure ment concerns dysfunctions flowing from imprecise measure ment of the states of social systems. Two broad classes of dysfunctions in these three areas are identified: (1) arriving at invalid conclusions which become the bases for erroneous policy decisions and (2) ignoring those dimensions and indicators of a concept that are most susceptible to social manipulation.

University authority and the student : the Berkeley experience

We may not be able to make you love reading, but university authority and the student the berkeley experience will lead you to love reading starting from now. Book is the window to open the new world. The world that you want is in the better stage and level. World will always guide you to even the prestige stage of the life. You know, this is some of how reading will give you the kindness. In this case, more books you read more knowledge you know, but it can mean also the bore is full.

Book Reviews : James B. Rule, Theories of Civil Violence. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1988, pp. 338,

This is an intelligent, nuanced, and wide-ranging book. Rule announces that it has two purposes: &dquo;First, it is a history of theories of civil violence, and of theoretically oriented research on the subject. Second, it is a study of social theory itself&dquo; (p. 1). But his claim is too modest. Among other things, Rule: critiques the major &dquo;theories&dquo; of collective action, violence, and order; codifies the empirically-grounded conclusions of these diverse approaches; examines the nature of social theory; ponders the interaction of metatheory, theory and research; suggests a guide for theoretically-informed empirical research; conducts a sociology of social theory by pointing out the sociallyconstructed barriers to cumulative progress; and exhorts us to continue the good fight for falsifiable theories. To no one’s surprise, Rule is not equally successful in all these endeavors; but he has something thought-provoking to say about each. Although collective (or civil-he uses the terms interchangeably) violence&dquo;deliberate destruction of persons or property by people acting together&dquo; (p. 6)-is the book’s linchpin, Rule recognizes that it has varied sources and manifestations. Moreover, violence is not the focus of all the theories he examines. Yet all warrant scrutiny because of an interest in collective destructive actions. Chapters 1 through 7, which are simultaneously historically and issue oriented, analyze these theories. Rule scans: Hobbes and his intellectual descendants (e.g., rational choice theory, Granovetter) ; Marx, Trotsky, and Pareto; the &dquo;irrationalists&dquo; (Tarde, Sighele, and LeBon) and collective behavior theory; Parsons and Smelser; Tilly and his followers; and relative deprivation and related psychological theories. There is also a brief excursus into the relevance of Durkheim, Weber, Simmel, and Coser. His review is perceptive and informative. The hero of this segment is Charles Tilly, his teacher; the villains are Parsons and Smelser.