This article offers an evaluation of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for Intelligence, a 1908 series of tests developed by French psychologists for the diagnosis of the level of intelligence of children. The scale had widespread application at the time, with minor variations to adapt to the needs of American children. By assessing each test and determining a number of flaws, such as overemphasis on “puzzle tests,” the author argues that, beyond small adjustments, an entirely new measuring scale is needed to test intellectual performance.

LEONARD P. AYRES was director of the Division of Education at the Russell Sage Foundation.

Three papers were read at a meeting of the American Public Health Association in 1916. They report on the lack of statistical evidence and analysis in health investigations, and why the statistical method is such a necessary element in public health research.

DONALD ARMSTRONG was executive officer of the Community Health and Tuberculosis Demonstration and assistant secretary of the National Association for the Study and Prevention of Tuberculosis.

FRANZ SCHNEIDER, JR. was sanitarian at the Department of Surveys and Exhibits of the Russell Sage Foundation.

LOUIS I. DUBLIN was statistician at the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.

A compilation of various surveys carried out by the RSF Department of Survey and Exhibits in 1915.

Americans have a reputation for moving often and far, for being committed to careers or lifestyles, not place. Now, with curtailed fertility, residential mobility plays an even more important role in the composition of local populations—and by extension, helps shape local and national economic trends, social service requirements, and political constituencies.

In Migration and Residential Mobility in the United States, Larry Long integrates diverse census and survey data and draws on many academic disciplines to offer a uniquely comprehensive view of internal migration patterns since the 1930s.  Long describes an American population that lives up to its reputation for high mobility, but he also reports a surprising recent decline in interstate migration and an unexpected fluctuation in the migration balance toward nonmetropolitan areas.  He provides unprecedented insight into reasons for moving and explores return and repeat migration, regional balance, changing migration flows of blacks and whites, and the policy implications of movement by low-income populations.

How often, how far, and why people move are important considerations in characterizing the lifestyles of individuals and the nature of social institutions.  This volume illuminates the extent and direction, as well as the causes and consequences, of population turnover in the United States.

A Volume in the RSF Census Series

The 1980 Census introduced a radical change in the measurement of ethnicity by gathering information on ancestry for all respondents, regardless of how long ago their forebears migrated to America, and by allowing respondents of mixed background to list more than one ancestry. The result, presented for the first time in this important study, is a unique and sometimes startling picture of the nation's ethnic makeup.

From Many Strands focuses on each of the sixteen principal European ethnic groups, as well as on major non-European groups such as blacks and Hispanics. The authors describe differences and similarities across a range of dimensions, including regional distribution, income, marriage patterns, and education. While some findings lend support to the "melting pot" theory of assimilation (levels of educational attainment have become more comparable and ingroup marriage is declining), other findings suggest the persistence of pluralism (settlement patterns resist change and some current occupational patterns date from the turn of the century).

In these contradictions, and in the striking number of respondents who report no ethnic background or report it incorrectly, Lieberson and Waters find evidence of considerable ethnic flux and uncover the growing presence of a new, "unhyphenated American" ethnic strand in the fabric of national life.

STANLEY LIEBERSON is professor of sociology at Harvard University.

MARY C. WATERS is assistant professor of sociology at Harvard University.

A Volume in the RSF Census Series

Once primarily used in medical clinical trials, random assignment experimentation is now accepted among social scientists across a broad range of disciplines. The technique has been used in social experiments to evaluate a variety of programs, from microfinance and welfare reform to housing vouchers and teaching methods. How did randomized experiments move beyond medicine and into the social sciences, and can they be used effectively to evaluate complex social problems? Fighting for Reliable Evidence provides an absorbing historical account of the characters and controversies that have propelled the wider use of random assignment in social policy research over the past forty years.

Drawing from their extensive experience evaluating welfare reform programs, noted scholar practitioners Judith M. Gueron and Howard Rolston portray randomized experiments as a vital research tool to assess the impact of social policy. In a random assignment experiment, participants are sorted into either a treatment group that participates in a particular program, or a control group that does not. Because the groups are randomly selected, they do not differ from one another systematically. Therefore any subsequent differences between the groups can be attributed to the influence of the program or policy. The theory is elegant and persuasive, but many scholars worry that such an experiment is too difficult or expensive to implement in the real world. Can a control group be truly insulated from the treatment policy? Would staffers comply with the random allocation of participants? Would the findings matter?

Fighting for Reliable Evidence recounts the experiments that helped answer these questions, starting with the income maintenance experiments and the Supported Work project in the 1960s and 1970s. Gueron and Rolston argue that a crucial turning point came during the 1980s, when Congress allowed states to experiment with welfare programs and foundations, states, and the federal government funded larger randomized trials to assess the impact of these reforms. As they trace these historical shifts, Gueron and Rolston discuss the ways that strategies for resolving theoretical and practical problems were developed, and they highlight the strict conditions required to execute a randomized experiment successfully. What emerges is a nuanced portrait of the potential and limitations of social experiments to advance empirical knowledge.

Weaving history, data analysis and personal experience, Fighting for Reliable Evidence offers valuable lessons for researchers, policymakers, funders, and informed citizens interested in isolating the effect of policy initiatives. It is an essential primer on welfare policy, causal inference, and experimental designs.

JUDITH M. GUERON is scholar in residence and President Emerita at MDRC.

HOWARD ROLSTON is principal associate at Abt Associates.