Title: Simplifying and editing frequency tables
Course: UGQuants (SSPS) > Section: Univariate Analysis

Simplifying and editing frequency tables

While there is nothing ‘wrong’ in presenting the various elements shown in the table above, if you think that this is a rather complicated way of presenting the distribution of data for one quite simple variable then you would probably be right. The format follows that of one of the software packages (SPSS) but an important skill of presenting data is always to edit the results from statistical software and present the data in your own way, only ever showing as much detail as you feel is necessary. It is rarely good practice to copy and paste tables directly from the output of statistical software.Source: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, 2010

Here are some useful guidance on how to produce your own tables in Word:

(Word 2003)

http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word-help/tables-i-create-and-format-basic-tables-RZ001200716.aspx

http://www.homeandlearn.co.uk/mw/s9p1.html

(Word 2007)

We could easily and effectively present the data in the table in two columns rather than 5. We might do this by retaining the first column and then showing only the percentage for each category in the second column. To do this we could either include the don’t know/not answered category, and thus report the figures in the current ‘Percent’ column, or we could exclude this category, report the figures from the ‘Valid Percent’ column, and add a brief note above or below the table to explain how many cases have been excluded and why.

It is usually unnecessary to give counts and percentages, and by adding the total number of cases to the bottom of the percentage column we would enable those reading the table to convert the percentages back into counts if they so wished. Showing cumulative percentages in tables is usually unnecessary: these can be highlighted in description and discussion of the table if necessary. Finally, we might also consider whether it is necessary to present the percentages to one decimal point: sometimes it is simpler and clearer to round percentages to the nearest whole number, again adding a brief note to explain this has been done.

Even a simple frequency table can sometimes tell an effective story and represent a substantial piece of evidence. For example, the data shown in the table above could be used as evidence to suggest that only a clear minority of people in Scotland support an independent Scotland separate from the UK. Equally, the data also make clear that the vast majority want some kind of Scottish parliament. Of course, this is only one source of evidence: as social and political researchers we often try to draw on multiple sources of evidence if this is possible.

It is also true that examining the distribution of values for one variable can only take us so far in quantitative analysis of social and political data: it is often more productive and revealing to compare more than one variable.

Preference for future government of Scotland

 | Frequency | Percent | Valid percent | Cumulative percent
Independent – separate from UK | 348 | 23.3 | 24.6 | 24.6
Part of UK with own parliament | 913 | 61.1 | 64.5 | 89.1
Part of UK without own parliament | 155 | 10.4 | 10.9 | 100
Don’t Know or

Not Answered
79
5.3
-
-
Total | 1495 | 100 | 100 | -