The fallacy of the ecological fallacy: the potential misuse of a concept and the consequences.

Sharon Schwartz

American Journal of Public Health · 1994 · 778 citations · 23 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Ecological studies have been evaluated in epidemiological contexts in terms of the “ecological fallacy,” yet empirical evidence shows a lack of comparability between ecological‑ and individual‑level correlations, making the conceptual meaning of the fallacy problematic. This paper aims to argue that cross‑level inference issues can be conceptualized as validity problems, a perspective not unique to ecological‑level analyses. The authors propose treating cross‑level inference problems as validity concerns, thereby reframing ecological analyses within a broader validity framework. This reframing increases recognition of inference problems in individual‑level studies and the unique contributions of ecological variables, expanding the scope for locating disease causes and designing interventions to improve public health.

Abstract

Ecological studies have been evaluated in epidemiological contexts in terms of the "ecological fallacy." Although the empirical evidence for a lack of comparability between correlations derived from ecological- and individual-level analyses is compelling, the conceptual meaning of the ecological fallacy remains problematic. This paper argues that issues in cross-level inference can be usefully conceptualized as validity problems, problems not peculiar to ecological-level analyses. Such an approach increases the recognition of both potential inference problems in individual-level studies and the unique contributions of ecological variables. This, in turn, expands the terrain for the location of causes for disease and interventions to improve the public's health.

References

23