Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Conventionally, sociologists measure the membership of an individual to a group by a “0 or 1” characteristic function. But when the definition of that group is fuzzy and an individual is neither a full member nor a nonmember, this dichotomous characteristic function may distort the reality. Instead of the “0 or 1” characteristic function by classical set theory, fuzzy set theory introduces a membership function which is a gradation from 0 to 1 to measure the degree to which an object (an individual) belongs to a concept (a group). Based on the rationale of fuzzy set theory, we suggest some new methods of data collection and analysis. Among several noteworthy findings, two points are emphasized: 1) the fuzzy set is an appropriate way of measuring the fuzziness of human thought; and 2) it allows one to relax the conventional assumption that all individuals have identical distributions and deviations around their means.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shaomin Li (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: