LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (March 2012)Back to main SPSSX-L pageJoin or leave SPSSX-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Mon, 19 Mar 2012 06:24:55 +0100
Reply-To:     John F Hall <johnfhall@orange.fr>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         John F Hall <johnfhall@orange.fr>
Subject:      Re: In support of CTABLES
Comments: To: Jon K Peck <peck@us.ibm.com>
Comments: cc: David Marso <david.marso@gmail.com>,
          Art@DrKendall.org, "Poes, Matthew Joseph" <mpoes@illinois.edu>,
          ViAnn Beadle <vab88011@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:  <OF093571FE.4AFBC43E-ON872579C5.007B035B-872579C5.007C1561@us.ibm.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

Jon

Waking up at 4:15 am, it was a delight to find your mail. This is brilliant. I've modified your syntax to suit my data set, but I need to work out how to get the syntax from the GUI since that's what students will use. Here are the tables (and syntax) I produced:

1: Zero order

ctables

/tables by happy [c] [ROWPCT.COUNT TOTALS[COUNT]]

/CATEGORIES VARIABLES=happy TOTAL=YES POSITION=AFTER .

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days?

Not too happy

Fairly Happy

Very happy

Total

Row N %

Row N %

Row N %

Count

6.2%

55.7%

38.1%

926

2: First order

CTABLES

/TABLE marital [C] BY happy [C][ROWPCT.COUNT TOTALS[COUNT]]

/CATEGORIES VARIABLES= marital happy TOTAL=YES POSITION=AFTER .

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days?

Not too happy

Fairly Happy

Very happy

Total

Row N %

Row N %

Row N %

Count

Marital status of respondent

Single

4.7%

70.0%

25.3%

150

Married

4.5%

51.9%

43.6%

649

Widowed

17.3%

59.2%

23.5%

98

Divorced or separated

13.8%

55.2%

31.0%

29

Total

6.2%

55.7%

38.1%

926

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days?

Not too happy

Fairly Happy

Very happy

Total

Row N %

Row N %

Row N %

Count

Sex of Respondent

Men

6.2%

59.7%

34.0%

385

Women

6.1%

52.9%

41.0%

541

Total

6.2%

55.7%

38.1%

926

The format of these tables is exactly what I want for earlier tutorials (and for reports): it's a shame I can't get them using CROSSTABS.

3: Second order

CTABLES

/TABLE marital [C] BY happy [C][ROWPCT.COUNT TOTALS[COUNT]]

/CATEGORIES VARIABLES= marital happy TOTAL=YES POSITION=AFTER .

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days? Total

Sex of Respondent

Total

Men

Women

Count

Count

Count

Marital status of respondent

Total

926

385

541

Single

150

76

74

Married

649

288

361

Widowed

98

15

83

Divorced or separated

29

6

23

OOPS!!

45 year old Algol programming instinct made me try:

CTABLES

/TABLE marital [C] > sex [c] by happy [C][ROWPCT.COUNT TOTALS[COUNT]]

/CATEGORIES VARIABLES= marital sex happy TOTAL=YES POSITION=after .

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days?

Not too happy

Fairly Happy

Very happy

Total

Row N %

Row N %

Row N %

Count

Marital status of respondent

Single

Sex of Respondent

Men

5.3%

75.0%

19.7%

76

Women

4.1%

64.9%

31.1%

74

Total

4.7%

70.0%

25.3%

150

Married

Sex of Respondent

Men

5.2%

55.6%

39.2%

288

Women

3.9%

49.0%

47.1%

361

Total

4.5%

51.9%

43.6%

649

Widowed

Sex of Respondent

Men

26.7%

60.0%

13.3%

15

Women

15.7%

59.0%

25.3%

83

Total

17.3%

59.2%

23.5%

98

Divorced or separated

Sex of Respondent

Men

16.7%

66.7%

16.7%

6

Women

13.0%

52.2%

34.8%

23

Total

13.8%

55.2%

31.0%

29

Total

Sex of Respondent

Men

6.2%

59.7%

34.0%

385

Women

6.1%

52.9%

41.0%

541

Total

6.2%

55.7%

38.1%

926

CTABLES

/TABLE sex [c] > marital [C] by happy [C] [ROWPCT.COUNT TOTALS[COUNT]]

/CATEGORIES VARIABLES= marital sex happy TOTAL=YES POSITION=after .

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days?

Not too happy

Fairly Happy

Very happy

Total

Row N %

Row N %

Row N %

Count

Sex of Respondent

Men

Marital status of respondent

Single

5.3%

75.0%

19.7%

76

Married

5.2%

55.6%

39.2%

288

Widowed

26.7%

60.0%

13.3%

15

Divorced or separated

16.7%

66.7%

16.7%

6

Total

6.2%

59.7%

34.0%

385

Women

Marital status of respondent

Single

4.1%

64.9%

31.1%

74

Married

3.9%

49.0%

47.1%

361

Widowed

15.7%

59.0%

25.3%

83

Divorced or separated

13.0%

52.2%

34.8%

23

Total

6.1%

52.9%

41.0%

541

Total

Marital status of respondent

Single

4.7%

70.0%

25.3%

150

Married

4.5%

51.9%

43.6%

649

Widowed

17.3%

59.2%

23.5%

98

Divorced or separated

13.8%

55.2%

31.0%

29

Total

6.2%

55.7%

38.1%

926

There's rather too much data in these tables: they might be more informative if the Total rows were dropped, leaving just the Total column as below, but tidier:

Q.53 How [happy] are you these days?

Not too happy

Fairly Happy

Very happy

Total

Row N %

Row N %

Row N %

Count

Total

6.2%

55.7%

38.1%

926

Sex of respondent

Men

6.2%

59.7%

34.0%

385

Women

6.1%

52.9%

41.0%

541

Marital status of respondent

Single

Men

5.3%

75.0%

19.7%

76

Women

4.1%

64.9%

31.1%

74

Married

Men

5.2%

55.6%

39.2%

288

Women

3.9%

49.0%

47.1%

361

Widowed

Men

26.7%

60.0%

13.3%

15

Women

15.7%

59.0%

25.3%

83

Divorced or separated

Men

16.7%

66.7%

16.7%

6

Women

13.0%

52.2%

34.8%

23

. . . or perhaps analyse only one category at a time to generate smaller tables.

The next step would be to take a criterion value for the dependent variable, ie value 1 (Not too happy) or value 3 (Very happy) and produce a summary table as in my earlier mail. In that, I used "Very happy", but being happy is normative, so I suspect it would be more interesting to pursue the "Not too happy" category.

I still need to check out David's syntax, but now that I've been let loose with a new toy, preparation of and planting in the vegetable garden will be a less attractive proposition: the next few days are going to be fun.

Cordialement

John

Email: johnfhall@orange.fr

Website: www.surveyresearch.weebly.com <http://surveyresearch.weebly.com/>

Skype: surveyresearcher1

Phone: (+33) (0) 2.33.45.91.47

From: Jon K Peck [mailto:peck@us.ibm.com] Sent: 18 March 2012 23:35 To: John F Hall Subject: RE: In support of CTABLES

One comment jumps out at me

"This table is easier to interpret, but we have lost the base for percentaging at the end of each row. Without special programming beyond the scope of this tutorial, SPSS cannot produce a table with n instead of 100%. A more useful table would look like this:"

In the Summary Statistics subdialog (and, of course, in the TABLE subcommand), you can choose different statistics for totals from the items tabulated.

For example, CTABLES /TABLE gender [C] BY jobcat [C][ROWPCT.COUNT TOTALS[COUNT]] /CATEGORIES VARIABLES=gender jobcat TOTAL=YES POSITION=AFTER .

gives you percents on the non-total cells and counts for the totals cells.

Jon Peck (no "h") aka Kim Senior Software Engineer, IBM peck@us.ibm.com new phone: 720-342-5621


[text/html]


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SPSSX-L page