James P. Scanlan, Attorney at Law

Home Page

Curriculum Vitae

Publications

Published Articles

Conference Presentations

Working Papers

Journal Comments

Truth in Justice Articles

Measuring Health Disp

Outline and Guide to MHD

Summary to MHD

Solutions

Solutions Database

Irreducible Minimums

Pay for Performance

Between Group Variance

Concentration Index

Gini Coefficient

Reporting Heterogeneity

Cohort Considerations

Relative v Absolute Diff

NHDR Technical Issues

MHD A Articles

MHD B Conf Presentations

MHD D Journal Comments

Consensus/Non-Consensus

Institutional Corresp

Scanlan's Rule

Outline and Guide to SR

Summary to SR

Semantic Issues

Employment Tests

Case Study

Case Study Answers

Subgroup Effects

Illogical Premises

Illogical Premises II

Inevitable Interaction

Feminization of Poverty S

Explanatory Theories

Mortality and Survival

Immunization Disparities

Truncation Issues

Collected Illustrations

Income Illustrations

Framingham Illustrations

Life Table Illustrations

NHANES Illustrations

Credit Score Illustration

Representational Disp

Statistical Signif SR

Comparing Averages

Meta-Analysis

Case Control Studies

Mortality and Survival 2

Measures of Association

Educational Disparities

Nuclear Deterrence

Employment Discrimination

Job Segregation

Measuring Hiring Discr

Disparate Impact

Four-Fifths Rule

Lending Disparities

Disparities - High Income

Underadjustment Issues

Lathern v. NationsBank

Holder/Perez Letter

Discipline Disparities

Disparate Treatment

Los Angeles SWPBS

Suburban Disparities

Disabilities - PL 108-446

NEPC Colorado Study

NEPC National Study

Duncan/Ali Letter

Feminization of Poverty

Affirmative Action

Affirm Action for Women

Other Affirm Action

Justice John Paul Stevens

Statistical Reasoning

The Sears Case

The AT&T Consent Decree

Cross v. ASPI

Vignettes

Times Higher Issues

Gender Diff in DADT Term

Adjustment Issues

Percentage Points

Odds Ratios

Statistical Signif Vig

Journalists & Statistics

Prosecutorial Misconduct

Outline and Guide

Misconduct Summary

B1 Agent Cain Testimony

B1a Bev Wilsh Diversion

B2 Bk Entry re Cain Call

B3 John Mitchell Count

B3a Obscuring Msg Slips

B3b Missing Barksdale Int

B4 Park Towers

B5 Dean 1997 Motion

B6 Demery Testimony

B7 Sankin Receipts

B7a Sankin HBS App

B8 DOJ Complicity

B9 Doc Manager Complaints

B9a Fabricated Gov Exh 25

B11a DC Bar Complaint

Letters (Misconduct)

Links Page

Misconduct Profiles

Arlin M. Adams

Jo Ann Harris

Bruce C. Swartz

Swartz Addendum 2

Swartz Addendum 3

Swartz Addendum 4

Swartz Addendum 7

Robert E. O'Neill

O'Neill Addendum 7

Paula A. Sweeney

Robert J. Meyer

Lantos Hearings

Password Protected

OIC Doc Manager Material

DC Bar Materials

Temp Confidential

DV Issues

Document Storage

Pre 1989

1989 - present

Presentations

Prosec Misc Docs

Prosec Misc Docs II

Profile PDFs

Misc Letters July 2008 on

Large Prosec Misc Docs

HUD Documents

Transcripts

Miscellaneous Documents

Unpublished Papers

Letters re MHD

Tables

MHD Comments

Figures

ASPI Documents

Web Page PDFs

Pages Transfer


Income Illustrations

(Jan. 9, 2012)

As discussed in many places, the pattern whereby the rarer an outcome the greater tends to be the relative difference in experiencing it and the smaller tends to be the relative difference in avoiding it can be illustrated with virtually any data set that allows one to examine various points on a continuum of factors associated with experiencing an outcome.  The pattern (and related patterns discussed in the Scanlan’s Rule page are illustrated with hypothetical test score data in Table 1 of the BSPS 2006 presentation (and the tables and figures of many other presentations found here), with NHANES data on blood pressure and folate level in the figure of  ICHPS 2008 presentation and the table on the NHANES Illustrations sub-page of the Scanlan’s Rule page (SR), life table information in the tables of the Life Tables Illustrations sub-page of SR, and information from the Framingham Studies on the Framingham Illustrations sub-page of SR.  One of the most readily available types of data illustrating these patterns is published income data showing proportions of different demographic groups falling below various percentages of the population, and hence demonstrating how lowering poverty will tend to increase relative differences in rates of avoiding poverty and reduce relative differences in rates of avoiding poverty, while increasing poverty will tend to have the opposite effects.

In addition to underlying some of the earliest illustrations of these patterns (e.g., The “feminization of poverty” is misunderstood (Plain Dealer 1987), The perils of provocative statistics (Public Interest 1991), such data underlie the table and figures in Can we actually measure health disparities? (Chance 2006).  The table from article is reproduced below.  The figures, which do not reproduce well on this page, can be viewed in the article.  As with all of the other illustrations of patterns of correlations between the overall prevalence of an outcome and measures of differences between rates of experiencing or avoiding the outcome, one must keep in mind that observed patterns are function of both the prevalence of an outcome and the differences between the underlying distributions (as well as irregularities in the distributions.  

 

 

Table 1

  Relationship of Black and White Rates

 of Falling Below and Above Various Percentages

of The Poverty Line with Black Representation of

Those Above and Below plus

Absolute Differences and Odds Ratios

Perc of

Pov Line

Perc Black

Below

Perc White

Below

Ratio B/W

Below

Perc Black

Above

Perc White

Above

Ratio B/W

Above

Black Rep

Among Below

Black Rep

Among Above

Absolute

Difference

Odds

Ratio

600

91.9

79.5

1.16

8.1

20.5

0.40

15.3

5.8

12.4

2.91

500

86.9

71.6

1.21

13.2

28.4

0.46

15.9

6.7

15.3

2.62

400

78.6

60.5

1.30

21.4

39.5

0.54

16.8

7.8

18.1

2.39

300

66.1

45.7

1.44

33.9

54.3

0.63

18.4

8.9

20.3

2.31

250

58.0

37.3

1.56

42.0

62.7

0.67

19.5

9.5

20.7

2.32

200

48.7

28.5

1.71

51.3

71.5

0.72

21.1

10.1

20.2

2.38

175

43.6

23.9

1.83

56.4

76.1

0.74

22.2

10.4

19.7

2.46

150

37.3

19.1

1.95

62.7

80.9

0.78

23.3

10.8

18.2

2.52

125

31.0

14.9

2.08

69.0

85.1

0.81

24.5

11.2

16.1

2.56

100

24.7

10.8

2.28

75.3

89.2

0.84

26.2

11.6

13.9

2.70

75

17.84

7.2

2.49

82.2

92.8

0.88

28.0

12.1

10.7

2.82

50

11.7

4.4

2.69

88.3

95.6

0.92

29.6

12.6

7.4

2.92