Wealth ranking in given field sites can be problematic for a number of reasons. This article explores the usefulness of Guttman Scaling and AnthroPac software in such contexts, using a small fishing community on the northern coast of Ecuador as an example. The author provides a step-by-step description of procedures for implementing and analyzing Guttman Scale methodology and discusses the issue of construct validity. The complementary relationship between qualitative and quantitative data is highlighted throughout.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, A. M, T. G. Evans, R. Mohammed, and J. Farnsworth. 1997. Socioeconomic stratification by wealth ranking: Is it valid?World Development25 (7): 1165–1172.
2.
Bernard, H. R.1995. Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. 2d ed.London: AltaMira.
Carneiro, R. L.1962. Scale analysis as an instrument for the study of cultural evolution. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology18:149–169.
5.
Carneiro, R. L.1973. Scale analysis, evolutionary sequences, and the rating of cultures. In A handbook of method in cultural anthropology, edited by R. Naroll and R. Cohen, 834–871. New York: Columbia University Press.
6.
DeWalt, B. R.1979. Modernization in a Mexican ejido. New York: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Edwards, A.1948. On Guttman's scale analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement8:313–318.
8.
Goodenough, W. H.1944. A technique for scale analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement4:179–190.
9.
Goodenough, W. H.1968. Comments on Graves et al. Current Anthropology10:329–329.
10.
Gorden, R.1977. Unidimensional scaling of social variables: Concepts and procedures. New York: Free Press.
11.
Grandin, B. E.1988. Wealth ranking in smallholder communities: A field manual. Nottingham, UK: Russell Press, Ltd.
12.
Graves, T. D., N. B. Graves, and M. F. Kobrin. 1968. Historical inferences from Guttman scales: The return of age-area magic. Current Anthropology10:317–327, 334–338.
13.
Guttman, L.1944. A basis for scaling qualitative data. American Sociological Review9:139–150.
14.
Guttman, L.1950. The basis for scalogram analysis. In Measurement of prediction, edited by S. Stouffer et al., 60–90. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15.
Hammel, E. A.1962. Social rank and evolutionary position in a coastal Peruvian village. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology18:199–215.
16.
Johnson, A.1998. Guttman scaling: An analysis of Matsigenki men's manufacturing skills. In Using methods in the field: A practical introduction and casebook, edited by V. de Munck and E. Sobo, 111–120. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
17.
Kay, P.1964. A Guttman scale model of Tahitian consumer behavior. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology20:160–167.
18.
Kronenfeld, D. B.1972. Guttman scaling: Problems of conceptual domain, unidimensionality, and historical inference. Man7:255–276.
19.
Marshall, M., and M. Borthwick. 1974. Consensus, dissensus and Guttman scales: The Namoluk case. Journal of Anthropological Research30:252–270.
20.
McIver, J. P., and E. G. Carmines. 1981. Unidimensional scaling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
21.
Menzel, H.1953. A new coefficient for scalogram analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly17:268–280.
22.
Pelto, P. J.1973. The snowmobile revolution: Technology and social change in the Arctic. Menlo Park, CA: Cummings.
23.
Pelto, P. J., and G. H. Pelto. 1978. Anthropological research: The structure of inquiry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Werner, D.1985. Psycho-social stress and the construction of a flood-control dam in Santa Catarina, Brazil. Human Organization44:161–166.
