http://surveyresearch.weebly.com/old-dog-old-tricks.html The first slideshow is quite fun and not covered in the main presentation. I'd appreciate your comments and suggestions.
All my materials are available for free download. Also I'm working on my own with no institutional affiliation or support, and on a fractional pension. Some of my closest professional colleagues have recently passed away: I hope that, before my own time comes, my site can help share with others something of the knowledge and skills I have acquired, and of the thrills I have enjoyed, as a survey researcher since 1965.
Incidentally, although I've been using SPSS since 1972, on dozens if not hundreds of data sets, I've never written any code except for a suite of survey analysis programs in Algol in the 1960's (input and output on 8-hole paper tape).
Meanwhile, I have a large garden to prepare for planting, a building extension to finish and a backlog of 400+ films recorded from (UK) TV to catch up on. Who said retirement was boring?
Cheers
John Hall
Email: johnfhall@orange.fr<mailto:johnfhall@orange.fr>
Website: www.surveyresearch.weebly.com<http://surveyresearch.weebly.com/>
Skype: surveyresearcher1
Phone: (+33) (0) 2.33.45.91.47
PS
From: Poes, Matthew Joseph [mailto:mpoes@illinois.edu]<mailto:[mailto:mpoes@illinois.edu]>
Sent: 16 March 2012 14:39
To: 'John F Hall'; 'SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU'
Subject: RE: In support of CTABLES
John,
I agree with you that new students need to learn how to code logic into SPSS. It's important to understand what these programs are doing. As long as students understand that in the real world, if using SPSS, they will likely use a canned module within the program to do these same functions, then learning the logic that underlies it is fine (just as learning to hand write a regression and solve).
However, I know you have considerably more experience with both SPSS and coding than I do, but I learned MRSETs in a matter of 30 minutes or so, and had a working understanding of CTables in probably the same time. I've only been working with the two actively for about 2 years now, but find them supremely easy to use. While I frequently make my CTables through the interface, instead of syntax, I can write my CTables via syntax without issue (it's just much quicker to let SPSS do it for me). In terms of MRsets, I always write this in syntax, and it doesn't take me long at all.
If nothing else, its very easy to make mistakes in long and complicated code, but the code for CTables and MRsets is not long and complicated unless your needs are long and complicated. Debugging this is a non-issue. I really don't understand why it took you so long to learn, why you are so resistant to them, and why you continue to post these disparaging remarks. I happen to love Ctables and MRsets in SPSS because I find they have made my life much easier. I was honestly shocked to find someone disagree with that. Maybe the issue is that we are each used to different things, and as a result what I am finding "time saving" you are finding "complicated."
I would be surprised if, in time, you didn't find Ctables to be a giant improvement over the old tables system, in terms of flexibility. While memorizing all of the possible code is daunting (I certainly have not myself) I find it easy to figure out.
Matthew J Poes
Research Data Specialist
Center for Prevention Research and Development
University of Illinois
510 Devonshire Dr.
Champaign, IL 61820
Phone: 217-265-4576
email: mpoes@illinois.edu<mailto:mpoes@illinois.edu>
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of John F Hall
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 12:27 AM
To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU<mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Subject: Re: In support of CTABLES
Jon
You made no mention of the MRSETS command.
It took me well over an hour to sort this out, and I know my way round SPSS reasonably well. Beginning students would clearly take much longer or give up altogether. To prepare a new tutorial for such students would take an unconscionably long time.
Much of my time was spent wading throught the CSR where nothing in CTABLES explaining MRSETS and it doesn't refer you to the separate MRSETS command. I discovered this by trying to run Analyze > Mult Response > Define ... before being pointed to Data > Define MR sets. (it didn't help that Mult Resp is buried at the bottom of the Analyze list.) I used PASTE from Data > Define MR sets to see the syntax generated.
MRSETS
/MCGROUP NAME=$prej VARIABLES=v608 v610 v612
/DISPLAY NAME=[$prej].
. .and ran your syntax substituting my own vars.
CTABLES /TABLE $prej BY v575.
Q.70e: How [prejudiced] would you describe yourself?
Very prejudiced
A little prejudiced
Not prejudiced
Count
Count
Count
$prej
Asians
25
148
0
Blacks
15
66
0
Coloureds
12
41
0
Pakistanis
24
105
0
Indians
9
42
0
Sikhs
1
3
0
West Indians
14
84
0
Africans
4
24
0
Other specified
8
36
0
Against all races
44
529
0
This proves the late Professor Sir Roger Jowell's contention that, "The verb to be prejudiced has no first person singular!" This was actually because V575 was a filter question and the question about groups prejudiced against was not asked of people who claimed not to be prejudiced. In cases like this it is sometimes useful to display the data in descending order of frequencies: can that be done in MR?
Being curious I then went into CTables to see what syntax was generated (Nice surprise to see mock-up tables to indicate what the output would contain!) . . to get the same table, but the generated syntax would, like the spider, have frightened Miss Muffitt and my students away.
CTABLES
/VLABELS VARIABLES=$prej v575 DISPLAY=DEFAULT
/TABLE $prej [COUNT F40.0] BY v575
/CATEGORIES VARIABLES=$prej v575 ORDER=A KEY=VALUE EMPTY=INCLUDE MISSING=EXCLUDE.
Anyway, thanks for the tip about shortened syntax for CTABLES. Some of the possibilities in the CSR seem promising. I'll play around with the format and contents to see if I can produce the kind of tables I used to recommend to students, but which couldn't be produced by SPSS. These would include tables with row % and a single base N on the same row (ie not two rows as in crosstabs) and tables to illustrate Lazarsfeldian elaboration as per Rosenberg.
John (with an h) Hall
Email: johnfhall@orange.fr<mailto:johnfhall@orange.fr>
Website: www.surveyresearch.weebly.com<http://surveyresearch.weebly.com/>
Skype: surveyresearcher1
Phone: (+33) (0) 2.33.45.91.47
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]<mailto:[mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]> On Behalf Of Jon K Peck
Sent: 15 March 2012 21:43
To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU<mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Subject: Re: In support of CTABLES
CTABLES has elaborate, although logical, syntax for complicated things. For simple things, it's as simple as it gets:
CTABLES /TABLE x BY y.
And for an MR set,
CTABLES /TABLE $x BY y.
Jon Peck (no "h") aka Kim
Senior Software Engineer, IBM
peck@us.ibm.com<mailto:peck@us.ibm.com>
new phone: 720-342-5621