Search

Comments on J. R. L. Allen's paper on the classification of cross-stratified units in sedimentology. Morphological features of cross-stratification; Non-genetic terminology.

The purpose of the research reported in this paper is to assess the usefulness of the instrumental-expressive typology in the study of voluntary associations using data provided by university students. The hypotheses center around two basic considerations. The first one extents to which members of the two types of associations differ according to a number of significant sociological variables (e.g., the degree of involvement in friendship networks outside the association). The second consideration is the possible differences in the ways new members are incorporated into instrumental and expressive associations. The three criteria determining the differentiation between the instrumental and expressive association are given. It also discusses personal influence and associational membership. Instrumental and expressive scores of nine associations are presented in tabular form. In conclusion, the instrumental and expressive dimensions represent a sociologically significant way of classifying associations. This distinction may be more useful in some sociological research than the more common systems of classification that are not directly related to sociological theory.

It is argued in this paper that regionalization is a similar process to classification. The terminology and procedures of the two are compared and it is concluded that there is a close similarity except that there is no direct analogy in regionalization with the individual of classification, it is suggested that operationally defined individuals partially overcome this problem. The histories of ideas about the nature and purpose of regional systems and classification systems are briefly compared and again found to be similar. Ten principles of classification derived from the work of logicians and taxonomists are then stated and the methods of constructing regional systems are examined in the light of these principles. It is shown that most of the points revealed by such an examination have been previously discussed by geographers, although they are arguing from different premises. Some of the principles, however, do raise problems which have hitherto received little attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constitutionally equivalent groups that occur in a single molecule are classified on the basis of their topic relationships by comparing their environments. The proposed classification extends earlier suggestions of Mislow and Raban. The existence of homotopic groups (those indistinguishable under any conditions) is related to the symmetry properties (gyrosymmetry) of rigid as well as flexible finite moieties. Stereoheterotopic groups (those that are distinguishable but occur in constitutionally equivalent environments) may be associated with various steric elements which will be fully discussed in a second paper. Each of these elements, the center, the axis, the plane and the torsional element, is divided into four mutually exclusive classes: the chiral and achiral elements of stereoisomerism; the prochiral and proachiral elements of prostereoisomerism. Of these classes, only the various centers of stereoisomerism and of prostereoisomerism are discussed in this report. Some modifications in our earlier proposals for the naming of individual stereoheterotopic groups are introduced. The utility of these new and revised terminologies for biochemical discussions is indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the classification of the elements in a binomial population, there is in many cases a chance of misclassifying an item. When an item in a sample from a binomial population is misclassified, it causes a bias, independent of the standard error, in the estimate of the population parameter P. This paper analyzes this bias when each of two interviewers independently classify the items in a single sample. Upper and lower bounds for the bias are derived. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Replies to Keith A. W. Crook's comments on the author's paper on the classification of cross-stratified units in sedimentology. Morphological features of cross-stratification; Non-genetic terminology.