Occupational coding: principles and examples

Abstract

A clear statement of the principles upon which good practice for the coding and categorisation of occupational titles should be based is necessary for this increasingly used source. Coding at heart trades com prehensibility for loss of information. The nature of the inferences involved must remain clear. Each code must be based on one set of occupational titles and not incor porate other sources on an occasional basis. Each list of titles needs its own code. Comparison of the titles from a poll book (voting list) and a trade directory for the early 1830s in Leeds, in the north of England, indicated that the titles varied according to the function of the document. Codes should follow the rules of good social science practice as well as being responsive to the qua lity and context of the document and the purpose of the study. Guidance was derived from a variety of 19th century studies which ranged from an Owenite journal to Mayhew and Booth. Although comparability was re jected as a primary aim of category making, close atten tion was paid to the major coding systems in use over the past fifty years. The outcome was the multi di mensional code quoted here, suited to the study of a 19th century industrial town, but the principals behind this code had a wider applicability. Hence all society would appear to arrange itself into four different clas ses: I. Those that will work II. Those that cannot work III. Those that will not work IV. Those that need not work Under one or other section of this quadruple division, every' member, not only of our community, but of every other civilized State, must necessarily be included; the rich, the poor, the industrious, the idle, the * Address all communications to Robert J. Morris, Dept. of Economic and Social History, William Robertson Building, George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JY, Great Britain.