
doi: 10.1111/ecca.12232
The standard theory of inequality measurement assumes that the equalisand is a cardinal quantity, with known cardinalization. However, one often needs to make inequality comparisons where either the cardinalization is unknown or the underlying data are categorical. We propose an alternative approach to inequality analysis that is rigorous, has a natural interpretation, and embeds both the ordinal data problem and the well‐known cardinal data problem. We show how the approach can be applied to the inequality of happiness and of health status.
[SHS] Humanities and Social Sciences, [SHS.ECO] Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and Finance, [QFIN] Quantitative Finance [q-fin]
[SHS] Humanities and Social Sciences, [SHS.ECO] Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and Finance, [QFIN] Quantitative Finance [q-fin]
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 65 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
