This paper examines reliability and validity in social work research by identifying and categorizing twelve key measurements used to study the relationship between poverty, substance abuse, homelessness, and panhandling in the United States. Each variable is classified by measurement type — interval, ordinal, or nominal — and assessed for its value in constructing a comprehensive portrait of these interconnected social problems. The paper also addresses the inherent challenges in measuring secretive or stigmatized behaviors, arguing that cross-referencing multiple data sources from longitudinal, nonpartisan studies is essential for producing valid and reliable findings.
This paper identifies and evaluates key measurements used to study the relationship between poverty, substance abuse, homelessness, and panhandling in the United States. Each variable is classified according to its measurement type — interval, ordinal, or nominal — and assessed for its usefulness in building a reliable and valid portrait of these interconnected social problems. Understanding social work research requires careful attention to how variables are defined and measured, particularly when dealing with vulnerable and often hidden populations.
1. Number of individuals living at or below the poverty line as compared with 1990 and 2000 (interval): The overall trend in poverty in the United States is important to measure, given that there has been growing evidence that while the "haves" have been getting richer, the poor have been getting poorer. The growth in the poverty epidemic and its relationship to substance abuse among the poor is one of the central features of interest in this study.
2. Number of females and males living at or below the poverty line (nominal): Poverty is often characterized as a "female" problem, particularly among young women with children. However, the stereotypical image of homelessness and panhandling is often male. Understanding poverty's gender-based nature and its relationship to homelessness, substance abuse, and ways of making a living is a critical aspect of the study.
3. Number of individuals seeking federal and other types of assistance for housing (nominal): Is homelessness a problem of personal psychology or of poverty? Identifying the number of individuals seeking assistance for housing helps clarify, to some degree, the voluntary nature of homelessness.
4. Number of individuals self-identified as having used illicit drugs within the past month, year, and over the course of their lifetime (ordinal): The National Institute on Drug Abuse measures drug, alcohol, and cigarette use based on individuals reporting use in the past month, the past year, and over a lifetime, in order to examine the different rates of experimental, casual, and chronic use and abuse. A key question is whether one population is more or less likely to suffer from homelessness as a result.
5. Number of individuals arrested for substance abuse-related crimes (nominal): This variable demonstrates the degree to which substance abuse has resulted in antisocial behavior, although of course not all individuals who abuse drugs are arrested for committing crimes.
6. Number of individuals spending time in homeless shelters (nominal): "Roughly 170,000 families spent at least one night in a shelter in 2009," according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. While reliable statistics on homelessness can be difficult to obtain, the number of individuals who seek refuge in shelters is one indication of the extent of the problem (Morales 2010).
7. Number of individuals identified as homeless in nightly head counts over a period of ten years (ordinal): Cities such as New York routinely conduct overnight head counts of the homeless population. While this provides only a specific portrait of a city's homeless population, a notable increase across major cities suggests that the problem is continuing to grow.
8. Number of individuals in substance abuse clinics and/or treatment reporting income below the poverty line (nominal): This variable could demonstrate a direct correlation between poverty and substance abuse.
9. Number of individuals in substance abuse clinics and/or treatment reporting they are homeless and/or have resorted to panhandling (nominal): This could show a direct correlation between homelessness, panhandling, and substance abuse.
10. Number of individuals stopped for panhandling by police: While police usually do not arrest individuals for panhandling, police logs of individuals who are reprimanded for doing so — and the circumstances under which they are stopped, such as whether the individual appeared homeless or showed signs of substance abuse — could be relevant if a pervasive pattern could be demonstrated on a large scale.
11. Average number of individuals at private substance abuse clinics versus publicly supported treatment (ordinal): This variable would paint a portrait of how income generates different standards of care, with wealthier individuals accessing private facilities while those with fewer resources rely on public programs.
"Reliability obstacles in tracking hidden populations"
Only by assessing a variety of statistics can a portrait of homelessness, drug abuse, poverty, and the means individuals deploy to survive be ascertained. The picture is not likely to be complete, but statistics should be validated with cross-referencing of other studies, preferably larger studies conducted longitudinally by nonpartisan sources.
You’re 77% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.