HW #1 Answers

Question 1: Causality

	IV	DV
a	Heavy metal music →	Teen violence
b1	Poverty →	Health
b2	Poverty →	Workforce attachment
c	Grades →	Self-esteem

Incorrect answers

workforce attachment influences poverty

music influences violence (question specified heavy metal music only)

heavy metal music influences teenagers (question specified teen violence)

Question 2: Measurement

2a. example indicators of economic prosperity: employment rate, minimum wage, per capita income, average income, # of computers or TV’s per household, % of population that own a home, % of people below poverty line

2b. example indicators of family violence: domestic violence arrest rates, child abuse arrest rates, # of police investigations of domestic violence or child abuse

2c. example indicators of educational attainment: graduation rates, SAT scores, college attendance rates, degrees earned

2d. example indicators of religiosity: church attendance, # bibles owner per 1000 people, % of people who tithe

2e. example indicators of health: average life expectancy, child mortality rates, incidence of disease, # days exercise per week, % body fat

2f. example indicators of criminality: arrest rates, inmate population size, drug use rates (if drug consumption is considered a crime)

The examples point to varying levels of analysis:

Individual vs. community/city/county (or vs. family, organization, state, etc…)

Individual Health: Whether or not attend gym

Health of a community: # of gym memberships

Question 2: Examples of Incorrect Answers

2a. economic prosperity: stock market (need to be more specific, what about the stock market?)

2c. educational attainment: income, sports ability, SES, self-esteem (these are predictors of educational attainment, not indicators of educational attainment)

2d. religiosity: less violence, morality (these are predictors of religiosity, not indicators of religiosity)

2e. health: Medicare (what about it?), insurance (what about? Prevalence of plans? Meaning what?), insurance rates (meaning what?)

2f. criminality: SES (a predictor, not an indicator)

Question 3. Identify Spurious Variable

Spurious variables influence/cause both the IV and the DV in a stated relationship. Hence they make a relationship appear to occur between the IV and DV.

	Spurious variable
IV		DV

Presence of schools → crime rates

Possible spurious variables:

• # of young men (age 18-25) in the area. Areas with schools have more men “at risk” of committing crime. So it is not having a school that causes crime, but large populations of young men, which is associated with the presence of high schools and crime.

• neighborhood size. Schools tend to be located in areas with greater population size than areas without schools (areas without schools tend to be more rural areas). In areas with higher population sizes there are more opportunities for crime (ex. more houses, businesses, and cars to break into or vandalize etc..)

Question 4. Explain Relationship

Can we state that women are more violent than men based on data that suggests of children murdered by parents, 55% are murdered by mothers, 45% by fathers.

No. Why?

• You cannot generalize and state women are more violent than men based on one type of violence.

• A 10% difference may not be substantively or statistically significant. We would need to know how big the sample was to assess the significance of a 10% difference.

• You need to take into account the different rates of exposure to children among men and women. Women tend to spend more time with children than do men. Hence, women, theoretically, have more “opportunities” to or are at “higher risk” of murdering their children than men.

• There are many other variables you would need to take into account to either conclude that more women murder their children than men do, or that women are more violent than men.

Question 5. Explain Relationship

Poverty seems to be becoming more prevalent, based on annual poverty rates since 1960. Do you agree or disagree?

Disagree.

• The % of people below the poverty line has decreased since 1960.

Agree.

• Although the % of people below the poverty line has decreased since 1960, our population size has increased since 1960 which, when taken into account, may actually result in a higher number of people below the poverty since 1960.

Undecided.

• The poverty line has changed since 1960 so we may not be able to compare annual poverty rates to make a conclusion as to whether poverty has become more prevalent.