National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 7 Best Practices for Federal Statistical Agencies
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×

References

Abramitzky, R., Platt Boustan, L., Erikssen, K., Feigenbaum, J.J., and Perez, S. 2019. Automated Linking of Historical Data. NBER Working Paper 25825. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w25825.

Amaya, A., Biemer, P.P., and Kinyon, D. 2020. Total error in a big data world: Adapting the TSE framework to big data. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 8(1): 89–119. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smz056.

American Association for Public Opinion Research. 2015. Examples of Survey Methodological Reporting that Are Consistent with AAPOR. https://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/transparency-initiative/Examples_Methodological_Reporting_Revised_081015.pdf.

Arnold, T., and Kuhfeld, W.F. 2015. The StatRep System for Reproducible Research. https://support.sas.com/rnd/app/papers/statrep/statrepmanual.pdf.

Atack, J., Bateman, F., Weiss, T. 2006. National Samples from the Census of Manufacturing: 1850, 1860, and 1870. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi: https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04048.v1.

Bagley, P. 1969. Extension of Programming Language Concepts. Gaithersburg, MD: National Bureau of Standards.

Basker, E., Becker, R.A., Foster, L., White, T.K., and Zawicki, A. 2019. Addressing Data Gaps: Four New Lines of Inquiry in the 2017 Economic Census. Working Papers 19-28. Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.

Bates, N., Dahlhamer, J., Phipps, P., Safit, A., and Tan, L. 2010. Assessing contact history paradata quality across several federal surveys. In Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association. http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/y2010f.html.

Beaumont, J.F. 2020. Are probability surveys bound to disappear for the production of official statistics? Survey Methodology, Statistics Canada, Catalogue No. 12-001-X, Vol. 46, No. 1. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/12-001-x/2020001/article/00001-eng.htm.

Becker, R.A. 2015. Water Use and Conservation in Manufacturing: Evidence from U.S. Microdata. Working Papers 15-16. Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×

Becker, R., and Grim, C. 2011. Newly Recovered Microdata on U.S. Manufacturing Plants from the 1950s and 1960s: Some Early Glimpses. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

Belli, R.F., Cordova Cazar, A.L., Eck, A., and Olson, K. 2019. American Time Use Survey (ATUS): CATI Paradata, 2010. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi: https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37318.v1.

Benguria, F., Vickers, C., and Ziebarth, N.L. 2020. Labor earnings inequality in manufacturing during the Great Depression. Journal of Economic History 80(2): 531–563.

Benzeval, M., Burton, J., Crossley, T.F., Fisher, P., Jäckle, A., Low, H., and Read, B. 2020. The Idiosyncratic Impact of an Aggregate Shock: The Distributional Consequences of COVID-19. IFS Working Paper W20/15. Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex. doi: https://doi.org/10.1920/wp.ifs.2020.1520.

Bertin, A.L., Bresnahan, T.F., and Raff, D.M.G. 1996. Localized competition and the aggregation of plant-level increasing returns: Blast furnaces, 1929-1935. Journal of Political Economy 104(2): 241–266.

Biemer, P.P. 2010. Total survey error: Design, implementation, and evaluation. Public Opinion Quarterly 74(5): 817–848. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq058.

Biemer, P.P., de Leeuw, E., Eckman, S., Edwards, B., Kreuter, F., Lyberg, L.E., Tucker, N.T., and West, B.T. 2017. Total Survey Error in Practice. New York: Wiley.

Brackstone, G. 1999. Managing data quality in a statistical agency. Survey Methodology, 25(2):139–149.

Bresnahan, T.F., and Raff, D.M.G. 2018. United States Census of Manufactures, Blast Furnace Industry, 1929, 1931, 1933, 1935. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi: https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37208.v1.

Callegaro, M. 2013. Paradata in Web Surveys. Pp. 259–279 in Improving Surveys with Paradata, edited by F. Kreuter. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118596869.ch11.

Chakrabarty, R.P., and Torres, G. 1996. American Housing Survey: A Quality Profile. Current Housing Reports H121/95-1. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

Chun, A.Y., Heeringa, S.G., and Schouten, B. 2018. Responsive and adaptive design for survey optimization. Journal of Official Statistics 34(3): 581–597. doi: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2018-0028.

Citro, C. 2014. Principles and practices for a federal statistical agency: Why, what, and to what effect. Statistics and Public Policy 1(1): 51–59.

Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The Promise of Evidence-Based Policymaking: Report of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. https://bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Full-Report-The-Promise-of-Evidence-Based-Policymaking-Report-of-the-Comission-on-Evidence-based-Policymaking.pdf.

Cunnyngham, K. 2020. Empirical Bayes Shrinkage Estimates of State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation Rates in Fiscal Year 2015 to Fiscal Year 2017 for All Eligible People and Working Poor People (August). Mathematica. https://www.mathematica.org/download-media?MediaItemId={680E1B82-9AF9-4848-A857-A0048FC6A82C.

Czajka, J., and Stange, M. 2018. Transparency in the Reporting of Quality for Integrated Data: A Review of International Standards and Guidelines. Mathematica, April 27. https://mathematica.org/publications/transparency-in-the-reporting-of-quality-for-integrated-data-a-review-of-international-standards.

Dahlhamer, J.M., and Simile, C.M. 2009. Subunit nonresponse in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS): An exploration using paradata. Proceedings of the Section on Government Statistics, American Statistical Association, Joint Statistical Meeting. http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/y2009/Files/302933.pdf.

Dippo, C., Fay, R., and Morganstein, D. 1984. Computing variances from complex samples with replicate weights. In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, pp. 489–494. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×

European Statistical System. 2019. Quality Assurance Framework of the European Statistical System. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/64157/4392716/ESS-QAF-V2.0-final.pdf.

Fay, R. 1984. Some properties of estimates of variances based on replication methods. In JSM Proceedings, Survey Research Methods Section, pp. 495–500. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology. 2020. A Framework for Data Quality. FCSM 20-04, Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology, September.

Findley, D. 2005. Some recent developments and directions in seasonal adjustment. Journal of Official Statistics 21(2): 343–365.

Garfinkel, S.L., and Leclerc, P. 2020. Randomness Concerns When Deploying Differential Privacy. Paper presented at 19th Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES’20), November 9, 2020 (virtual event). Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.03777.

Genadek, K.R., and Alexander, J.T. 2019. The Decennial Census Digitization and Linkage Project. ADEP Working Paper 2019-0. Associate Directorate for Economic Programs.

Genadek, K.R., Massey, C.G., Alexander, T., Garber, T.K., and O’Hara, A. 2018. Linking the 1940 U.S. Census with modern data: Historical methods. A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History 51(4): 246–257.

Gentner, D., and Kurtz, K. 2005. Learning and using relational categories. In Categorization Inside and Outside the Laboratory, edited by W.K. Ahn, R.L. Goldstone, B.C. Love, A.B. Markman, and P.W. Wolff. Washington, DC: APA.

Gillman, D. 2018. Using DDI and GSBPM Together at the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. UNECE Modern Stats World Workshop, Geneva, April 2018. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/documents/ece/ces/ge.58/2018/mtg1/USA_GILLMAN_Presentation.pdf.

Gould, W. 2011. Precision (yet again), Part I. The Stata Blog, June 17. https://blog.stata.com/2011/06/17/precision-yet-again-part-i.

Groves, R.M., and Lyberg, L. 2010. Total survey error: Past, present, and future. Public Opinion Quarterly 74(5): 849–879. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq065.

Hansen, M.H., Hurvitz, W.N., and Bershad, M.A. 1961. Measurement error in censuses and surveys. Bulletin de Institut International de Statistique 38(2): 359–374.

Hirsch, B.T., and Schumacher, E.J. 2004. Match bias in wage gap estimates due to earnings imputation. Journal of Labor Economics 22(3): 689–722.

Jabine, T.B., King, K.E., and Petroni, R.J. 1990. Survey of Income and Program Participation Quality Profile, 2nd edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

Kalton, G. 1998. SIPP Quality Profile 1998, SIPP Working Paper Number 230, 3rd edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

Katz, L.F., and Krueger, A.B. 2019. Understanding Trends in Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States (January). NBER Working Paper No. w25425. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=3311399.

Kish, L. 1962. Studies of interviewer variance for attitudinal variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 57: 92–115.

Knuth, D.E. 1992. Literate programming. CSLI Lecture Notes, no. 27. https://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/site/CSIN.shtml.

Kreuter, F. 2013. Introduction. In Improving Surveys with Paradata, edited by F. Kreuter. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kunz, T., and Hadler, P. 2020. Web Paradata in Survey Research. Mannheim, Germany: GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences (GESIS – Survey Guidelines). doi: 10.15465/gesis-sg_037.

Larrimore, J., Burkhauser, R.V., Feng, S., and Zayatz, L. 2008. Consistent cell means for top-coded incomes in the public use March CPS. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement 33(2–3): 89–128.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×

Lavrakas, P.J. 2008. Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods (Vols. 1-0). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947.

Lenth, R.V., and Hjøsgaard, S. 2007. SASweave: Literate programming using SAS. http://homepage.divms.uiowa.edu/~rlenth/SASweave/.

Lohr, S.L., and Raghunathan, T. 2017. Combining survey data with other data sources. Statistical Science 32(2): 293–312.

Maitland, A., Casas-Cordero, C., and Kreuter, F. 2009. An evaluation of nonresponse bias using paradata from a health survey. Proceedings of the Section on Government Statistics, American Statistical Association, Joint Statistical Meetings.

Management Council of the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. 2012. Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). Recommended Practice CCSDS 650.0-M-2. Magenta Book. https://public.ccsds.org/pubs/650x0m2.pdf.

McCullough, B.D., and Vinod, H.D. 1999. The numerical reliability of econometric software. Journal of Economic Literature 37(2): 633–665. doi: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.37.2.633.

Mulry, M.H., and Spencer, B.D. 1991. Total error in PES estimates of population. Journal of the American Statistical Association 86(416).

NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2017. Innovations in Federal Statistics: Combining Data Sources While Protecting Privacy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/24652.

NASEM. 2019a. Methods to Foster Transparency and Reproducibility of Federal Statistics: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25305.

NASEM. 2019b. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25303.

NASEM. 2021. Principles and Practices for a Federal Statistical Agency, Seventh Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25885.

Oberski, D.L., Kirchner, A., Eckman, S., and Kreuter, F. 2017. Evaluating the quality of survey and administrative data with generalized multitrait-multimethod models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 112(520): 1477–1489.

Olson, K. 2013. Paradata for nonresponse adjustment. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 645(1): 142–170. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212459475.

Olson, K.M., Smyth, J., Dykema, J., Holbrook, A.L., Kreuter, F., and West, B.T. 2020. The Past, Present, and Future of Research on Interviewer Effects. pp. 1–14 in Interviewer Effects from a Total Survey Error Perspective, K.M. Olson, J. Smyth, J. Dykema, A.L. Holbrook, F. Kreuter, and B.T. West, editors. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.

Prasad, N.G.N., and Rao, J.N.K. 1990. The estimation of the mean squared error of small-area estimators. Journal of the American Statistical Association 85(409): 163–171.

Raff, D.M.G. 1988. Representative firm analysis and the character of competition: Glimpses from the Great Depression. American Economic Review 88(2): 57–61.

Rancourt, E. 2018. Admin-first as a statistical paradigm for Canadian official statistics: Meaning, challenges and opportunities. Proceedings of Statistics Canada Symposium 2018—Combine to Conquer: Innovations in the Use of Multiple Sources of Data. https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/conferences/symposium2018/program/03a2_rancourt-eng.pdf.

Rancourt, E. 2019. The scientific approach as a transparency enabler throughout the data life-cycle. Statistical Journal of the IAOS 35(4): 549–558.

Reid, G., Holmberg, A., and Zabala, F. 2017. Extending TSE to administrative data: A quality framework and case studies from Stats NZ. Journal of Official Statistics 33(2): 477–511. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/JOS-2017-0023.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×

Schaeffer, N.C., Min, B.H., Purnell, T., Garbarski, D., and Dykema, J. 2018. Greeting and response: Predicting participation from the call opening. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology 6(1): 122–148. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smx014.

Schwanhäuser, S., Sakshaug, J.W., Kosyakova, Y., and Kreuter, F. (Eds.). 2020. Statistical identification of fraudulent interviews in surveys: Improving interviewer controls. Appendix 7 in Interviewer Effects from a Total Survey Error Perspective. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

SCOPE Metadata Team. 2020. Metadata Systems for the U.S. Statistical Agencies, in Plain Language. Prepared for Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology, July 10, 2020, Washington, DC. Available: https://nces.ed.gov/fcsm/metadata_systems.asp.

Stodden, V., Seiler, J., and Ma, Z. 2018. An empirical analysis of journal policy effectiveness for computational reproducibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 115(11): 2584–2589. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708290115.

Sundgren, B. 1973. An Infological Approach to Data Bases. Sweden: National Central Bureau of Statistics. https://sites.google.com/site/bosundgren/my-life/AnInfologicalApproachtoDataBases.pdf?attredirects=0.

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 2014. A Suggested Framework for National Statistical Offices for Assessing the Quality of Big Data. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cros/system/files/Task%20Team%20Big%20Data%20Quality%20Framework_937_unblinded_v1.pdf.

United Nations Statistics Division. 2016. UN Statistics Quality Assurance Framework. Available at https://unstats.un.org/unsd/unsystem/Documents-March2017/UNSystem-2017-3-QAF.pdf.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2014. American Community Survey Design and Methodology. http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/methodology/design_and_methodology/acs_design_methodology_report_2014.pdf.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2015. Statistical Quality Standard F2: Providing Documentation to Support Transparency in Information Products. Available at https://www.census.gov/about/policies/quality/standards/standardf2.html.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. Current Population Survey Technical Paper. CPS TP77. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/methodology/CPS-Tech-Paper-77.pdf.

U.S. Department of Commerce. 1978. Statistical Policy Handbook. Washington, DC. https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/007418500.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). 2006. Standards and Guidelines for Statistical Surveys. Washington, DC. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/statpolicy/standards_stat_surveys.pdf.

Vardigan, M., and Whiteman, C. 2007. ICPSR meets OAIS: Applying the OAIS reference model to the social science archive context. Archival Science 7: 73–87. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-006-9037-z.

Vickers, C., and Ziebarth, N.L. 2018. United States Census of Manufactures, 1929-1935. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. doi: https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37114.v1.

Wang, J., Kuo, T.-Y., Li, L., and Zeller, A. 2020. Assessing and restoring reproducibility of Jupyter Notebooks. In 35th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE ’20), September 21–25, 2020 (virtual event), Australia. New York: ACM. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3324884.3416585.

West, B.T., Yan, T., Kreuter, F., Josten, M., and Schroeder, H. 2020. Examining the utility of interviewer observations on the survey response process. Chapter 8 in Interviewer Effects from a Total Survey Error Perspective, edited by K.M. Olson, J. Smyth, J. Dykema, A.L. Holbrook, F. Kreuter, and B.T. West, editors. New York: Taylor-Francis Group. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×

Wilkinson, M., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I., et al. 2016. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data 3:160018. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18.

Wolter, K., and Hogan, H. 1988. Census Coverage Evaluation: Implications of the Past and Plans for the Future. Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census Statistical Research Division. doi: http://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/1988_019.pdf.

Zhang, L.C. 2012. Topics of statistical theory for register-based statistics and data integration. Statistica Neerlandica 66: 41–63. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9574.2011.00508.x.

Zieschang, K.D. 1990. Sample weighting methods and estimation of totals in the Consumer Expenditure Survey. Journal of the American Statistical Association 85(412): 986–1001.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×
Page 171
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×
Page 172
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×
Page 173
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×
Page 174
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×
Page 175
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26360.
×
Page 176
Next: Appendix A: Statistical Metadata Standards - in Detail »
Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies Get This Book
×
 Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies
Buy Paperback | $35.00 Buy Ebook | $28.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Widely available, trustworthy government statistics are essential for policy makers and program administrators at all levels of government, for private sector decision makers, for researchers, and for the media and the public. In the United States, principal statistical agencies as well as units and programs in many other agencies produce various key statistics in areas ranging from the science and engineering enterprise to education and economic welfare. Official statistics are often the result of complex data collection, processing, and estimation methods. These methods can be challenging for agencies to document and for users to understand.

At the request of the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES), this report studies issues of documentation and archiving of NCSES statistical data products in order to enable NCSES to enhance the transparency and reproducibility of the agency's statistics and facilitate improvement of the statistical program workflow processes of the agency and its contractors. Transparency in Statistical Information for the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and All Federal Statistical Agencies also explores how NCSES could work with other federal statistical agencies to facilitate the adoption of currently available documentation and archiving standards and tools.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!