首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>American Journal of Public Health >The logic in ecological: II. The logic of design.
【2h】

The logic in ecological: II. The logic of design.

机译:生态学的逻辑:II。设计的逻辑。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The utility of ecological studies is considered in terms of the salience of their designs and is exemplified in four levels: obligate and apt; optional and apt; optional, not apt but convenient; and maladroit (neither obligate, apt, nor justifiable by convenience). Ecological studies are obligate when they are the only choice available, either because of the question asked (as in testing differences between groups and discovering group effects), or where there are "dependent happenings" (as in transactions involving more than one individual), or because individual data are lacking. Apt studies are logically appropriate; analysis and results are not extrapolated beyond necessity or without precautions. Obligate studies enforced by lack of individual data may be apt or less than apt. Optional ecological studies may be apt or, if less than apt, they may yet be convenient. Maladroit studies are neither obligate, apt, nor convenient. Each class of study is illustrated by examples ordered according to a standard design hierarchy.
机译:生态研究的效用是根据其设计的突出性来考虑的,并从四个方面进行了举例说明:专心的和适当的;可选和适当的;可选的,不方便,但方便;和恶意(既不专心,也不恰当,也不为方便辩解)。生态研究是唯一可行的选择,无论是由于提出的问题(例如测试群体之间的差异和发现群体效应),还是存在“依赖事件”(例如涉及多个人的交易),或者是因为缺少个人数据。 Apt研究在逻辑上是适当的;分析和结果不会超出必要范围或没有预防措施。由于缺乏个人数据而进行的专项研究可能是恰当的,也可能是不合适的。可选的生态学研究可能是合适的,或者如果不够合适,它们可能会很方便。恶意的研究既不专心,也不恰当,也不方便。每个学习类别均通过根据标准设计层次结构排序的示例进行说明。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号