Date:         Wed, 16 Apr 1997 08:26:46 -0400
Reply-To:     "Dr. Clarke Harris" <harris@MAIL.DMS.STATE.FL.US>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Clarke Harris" <harris@MAIL.DMS.STATE.FL.US>
Subject:      Re: Interesting question
Comments: To: mmorin@pcix.com
Comments: cc: Conner Coral <conner@mail.dms.state.fl.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

        Yes...I think I know the answer Ben, Dr Morin's answer aside. SPSS was the
first (and only) statistical package available to most graduate students in
the social sciences in the mid 1970's, the use of which, did not require a
mathematical graduate education! SPSS allowed most of us who had to process
large amounts of data (for our dissertations) to use a computerized package
which was user-friendly. To my knowledge, there was nothing else! Get a
xeroxed copy of the pertinant chapter in the old "Maroon Manual" (Nie et.
al.), punch your data cards (no point and click in those days), feed them
into the hopper and "whamo"...pick up your ANOVA with post-hocs the next
day at the computer center!  Consequently, this is the package we remained
loyal to!
        Most persons in the natural science and mathematics were probably able to
write their own programs, and didn't need pre-cut "packages" to analyze
their data.
        An interesting question Mark...curious to hear the other responses
 
                Clarke S Harris harris@mail.dms.state.fl.us
----------
 
>
> Ben West wrote:
> >
> > Surprisingly enough, I don't have a technical question for the group
today.
> > As a matter of fact, things have been running quite smoothly lately.
> > However, I do have a question to propose that has boggled me....
> >
> > Why is it that SPSS is used, almost exclusively, by folks in the social
> > sciences yet is used very seldom by people in other fields (i.e.,
natural,
> > life sciences)?  Of course, I could be wrong in this observation, but
that's
> > the way it appears.   I'm in the natural sciences and most of my
> > counterparts use SAS, which, granted, is somewhat more versatile that
SPSS.
> > However, I know of nobody in my circle of peers that is doing analyses
that
> > couldn't be done just as well, and much more easily, with SPSS.  I
don't
> > mean to be criticizing SAS, it's a great program and I have used it
from
> > time to time, but my primary statistical package is, and always will
be,
> SPSS.
> >
>
> > Ben West
> >
>Dr Morin wrote:
>
> Might it have something to do with that is what it was designed for.
> After all it is the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.
>
> MM