An uncertainty principle in demography and the unisex issue

American Statistician

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 1986, Pages 32-39

  Cohen, Joel E ^a  

^a ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; Pooling; Sex differences in mortality; Simpson s paradox; Spurious correlation; Stratification

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS; DEMOGRAPHY; DIFFERENTIAL MORTALITY; LIFE TABLE; LIFE TABLE METHOD; METHODOLOGICAL STUDIES; MORTALITY; POPULATION; POPULATION AND POPULATION RELATED PHENOMENA; POPULATION DYNAMICS; RESEARCH; RESEARCH METHODOLOGY; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIOLOGY; TECHNIQUE; WORLD;

DATA ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS; DEMOGRAPHY; DIFFERENTIAL MORTALITY; LIFE TABLE METHOD; LIFE TABLES; METHODOLOGICAL STUDIES; MORTALITY; POPULATION; POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS; POPULATION DYNAMICS; RESEARCH METHODOLOGY; SEX FACTORS; SOCIAL SCIENCES; WORLD;

DEMOGRAPHY; LIFE TABLES; METHODS; MORTALITY; POPULATION; POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS; POPULATION DYNAMICS; RESEARCH; SEX FACTORS; SOCIAL SCIENCES; STATISTICS;

EID: 0022662817     PISSN: 00031305     EISSN: 15372731     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00031305.1986.10475351     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bickel, P. J., Hammel, E. A., and O’Connell, J. W. (1975), “Sex Bias in Graduate Admissions: Data from Berkeley,” Science, 187, 398-404. Reprinted in: Statistics and Public Policy, eds. W. B. Fairley and C. F. Mosteller, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1977, pp. 113-130.
2. Blyth, C. R. (1972), “On Simpson’s Paradox and the Sure-Thing Principle,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 67, 364-366.
3. Cohen, M. R., and Nagel, E. (1934), An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method, New York: Harcourt, Brace.
4. Comfort, A. (1979), The Biology of Senescence (3rd ed.), New York: Elsevier.
5. Dawid, A. P. (1979), “Conditional Independence in Statistical Theory,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser. B, 41, 1-31.
6. Gill, J. L. (1978), Design and Analysis of Experiments in the Animal and Medical Sciences, Ames: Iowa State University Press.
7. Heckman, J. J., and Singer, B. (1982a), “The Identification Problem in Econometric Models for Duration Data,” in Advances in Econometrics, ed. W. Hildenbrand, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3977.
8. Heckman, J. J., and Singer, B. (1982b), “Population Heterogeneity in Demographic Models,” in Multidimensional Mathematical Demography, eds. K. Land and A. Rogers, New York: Academic Press, pp. 567-599.
9. Keyfitz, N. (1968), Introduction to the Mathematics of Population, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10. Keyfitz, N., and Rieger, W. (1968), World Population: An Analysis of Vital Data, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Kitagawa, E. M. (1955), “Components of a Difference Between Two Rates,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50, 1168-1194; Corrigenda (1956), 51, 651.
12. Kruskal, W. H. (1977), “Notes” [on Bickel et al. (1975)], in Statistics and Public Policy, eds. W. B. Fairley and C. F. Mosteller, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, pp. 127-129.
13. Kruskal, W. H. (1984), “Concepts of Relative Importance,” Questrd, 8, 39-45.
14. Lachapelle, R., and Henripin, J. (1982), The Demolinguistic Situation in Canada: Past Trends and Future Prospects, Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy and Brookfield Publishing Co.
15. Lindley, D. V., and Novick, M. R. (1981), “The Role of Exchangeability in Inference,” Annals of Statistics, 9, 45-58.
16. Mac Arthur, J. W., and Baillie, W. H. T. (1932), “Sex Differences in Mortality in Abraxas-Type Species,” Quarterly Review of Biology, 7, 313-325.
17. Paik, M. (1985), “A Graphic Representation of a Three-Way Contingency Table: Simpson’s Paradox and Correlation,” The American Statistician, 39, 53-54.
18. Shapiro, S. H. (1982), “Collapsing Contingency Tables-A Geometric Approach,” The American Statistician, 36, 43-46.
19. Shryock, H. S., Siegel, J. S., and Associates (1973), The Methods and Materials of Demography (rev. ed.), Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
20. Simpson, E. H. (1951), “The Interpretation of Interaction in Contingency Tables,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser. B, 13, 238-241.
21. Snedecor, G. W., and Cochran, W. G. (1967), Statistical Methods (6th ed.), Ames: University of Iowa Press.
22. Sunder, S. (1983), “Simpson’s Reversal Paradox and Cost Allocation,” Journal of Accounting Research, 21, 222-233.
23. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association-College Retirement Equities Fund (1980), “EEOC Approves TIAA-CREF Unisex Mortality Table for Future Pension Premiums,” March press release, New York: Author.
24. Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association-College Retirement Equities Fund (1983), 1982 Annual Report, New York: Author.
25. Trussed, J., and Richards, T. (1985), “Correcting for Unmeasured Heterogeneity in Hazard Models Using the Heckman-Singer Procedure,” in Sociological Methodology, ed. N. Tuma, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 242-276.
26. Tussman, J., and tenBroek, J. (1949), “The Equal Protection of the Laws,” California Law Review, 37, 341-381.
27. U.S. Congress, House (1983), Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Transportation, and Tourism, Nondiscrimination in Insurance Act of 1983: Hearings on H.R. 100, February 22 and 24, 1983, 98th Cong., 1st Sess., Ser. No. 98-35, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
28. U.S. Supreme Court (1983), Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans, etc., et al., Petitioners v. Nathalie Norris etc., Slip Opinion No. 82-52, Washington, DC: Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States.
29. Vaupel, J. W., and Yashin, A. I. (1985), “Heterogeneity’s Ruses: Some Surprising Effects of Selection on Population Dynamics,” The American Statistician, 39, 176-185.
30. Wagner, C. H. (1982), “Simpson’s Paradox in Real Life,” The American Statistician, 36, 46-48.
31. Yule, G. U. (1903), “Notes on the Theory of Association of Attributes in Statistics,” Biometrika, 2, 121-134.