 |
 |
Dear Ken & list, > But somewhere between that 90% and 5% is a line, above which details > of the "Other" need to looked at carefully. Where is that line? Interesting question :-) I would say that breaking down 'other' is essentially a more exploratory, qualitative approach to the question. I would therefore be inclined to use a more qualitative reasoning and say 'break it down as long as it's useful'. I can imagine you'd prefer a more systematic/structured algorithm though, but then the problem becomes that you need the assumption that the frequency, with which something gets mentioned, is indicative of its relevance . . . And even when you're willing to make that assumption, you get back at your original question - when is something relevant enough to break down? I hope (but doubt :-)) this helps you, or at least helps the discussion :-) Kind regards, Gjalt-Jorn --- Gjalt-Jorn Peters Work & Social Psychology, faculty of Psychology & Neuroscience, Maastricht University