Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-qdpjg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-17T18:01:28.797Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

II.—The Maximal Range of Error in Gross Reproduction Rates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2014

Enid Charles
Enid Charles
Affiliation:
Department of Natural History, University of Aberdeen
Get access

Extract

In the past two methods have been applied to the study of differential fertility. One may be called the absolute method, recently applied to Scottish data by the writer. The other may be called the comparative method, subsequently applied to the same statistics by Mr Barclay and Dr Kermack. Since the conclusions obtained by the two methods are not always consonant, it is important to evaluate the scope and reliability of each.

Type
Proceedings
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , 1940 , pp. 18 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Barclay, R. S., and Kermack, W. O., 1939. “The Fertility of Scottish Married Women, with Special Reference to the Period 1926–1935,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. lix, pp. 62–80.Google Scholar
Charles, E., 1938. “Differential Fertility in Scotland, 1911–1931,” Part I. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. lix, pp. 371–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charles, E., 1938. “The Changing Structure of the Family in Australia,” Chap. V, Political Arithmetic.Google Scholar
Glass, D., 1938. “Changes in Fertility in England and Wales,” Chap. IV, Political Arithmetic.Google Scholar
Kuczynski, R. R., 1935. The Measurement of Population Growth. League of Nations Statistical Year Book, 1937–38.Google Scholar