Comparison

(redirected from comparison groups)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Legal, Financial.

comparison

[kəm′par·ə·sən]
(computer science)
A computer operation in which two numbers are compared as to identity, relative magnitude, or sign.

Comparison

 

comparing a gauge or quantity to be measured with a quantity that is reproducible in the measuring process.

Comparisons are made by instruments such as the equal-arm balance, the electric potentiometer, the photometer bench with a photometer, and the comparator for linear standards.


Comparison

 

an act of thought by means of which the content of being and cognition is classified, ordered, and evaluated; in comparison, the world is understood to be “coherent” diversity. The act of comparison consists of the pairing of objects for the purpose of clarifying their relationship. Essential to this are the conditions, or bases, of comparison—the attributes that determine precisely what the possible relationships are between objects.

Comparison has meaning only in an aggregate of “homogeneous” objects that form a class. The comparability of objects in a class (tertium comparationis) is realized in terms of the attributes essential for a particular examination; objects comparable in terms of one basis may be incomparable in terms of another. For example, all people are comparable in terms of age, but not all are comparable with respect to “being older.”

The simplest and most important type of relationships revealed by means of comparison are the relationships of identity (equality) and difference. Comparison of this type leads in turn to the concept of universal comparability, that is, the notion that it is always possible to answer the question of whether objects are identical or different. Objects of visual experience are always comparable, although the condition of visibility, or observability, is a significant restriction. In theory, the visual comparison of objects is often impossible, and to compare objects it is necessary to resort to inferences and, eventually, to certain abstractions from which the inferences have been deduced. The supposition of universal comparability is therefore sometimes called the abstraction of comparability. As a rule, the abstraction of comparability is a nontrivial hypothesis and is valid within the framework and on the basis of the main principles of theory.

M. M. NOVOSELOV [24–1047–1; updated]

References in periodicals archive ?
Most students in the treatment and comparison groups were 14 or 15 years of age (treatment group: n = 131, 93%; comparison group: n = 101, 88%).
Each individual in the benefits counseling group was matched, according to procedures described below, to one similar consumer in the contemporaneous comparison group and one similar consumer in the historical comparison group.
Although there were high rates of drop-outs (30% and 39% in the intervention and comparison groups respectively), this did not affect the result as the sample size taken was much above 28, the number required for the results to be statistically significant.
Real Wages of Registered Nurses and Comparison Groups, 1988-1998 Registered Nurses Comparison Groups Year All Hospital Non-Hospital Non-Health 1988 $17.
The comparison group consisted of students enrolled in physical education or geography classes at the same two schools.
14 at posttest for the experimental group, whereas the comparison group increased slightly with 22.
A good comparison group would contain offenders with similar offending histories to the Ilderton group up to the point when the latter started at Ilderton.
There was therefore no overlap between the performance of the comparison group and the dyslexic children on the analogy task.
Table 2 Mean Scores on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale of Treatment and Comparison Groups Before and After Treatment Before After p Treatment Treatment Value Treatment group 15.
When all camper and comparison groups were combined for analysis, the effect of this specialized camp program on depression levels in children aged eight to 12 becomes even more evident.
3_j] (j = 1,2, 3) are the relevant policy parameters of interest that measure the impact of the ACA on dental care use over and above any change in utilization in the set of states chosen as the comparison group.
In order to investigate the prevalence of psychiatric and behavioural problems in Azerbaijani children with epilepsy, we administered the Azeri version of the SDQ to the parents of the epilepsy and comparison groups.

Full browser ?