Ferraro K F
Department of Sociology, Northern Illinois University.
J Gerontol. 1989 Jan;44(1):S14-6. doi: 10.1093/geronj/44.1.s14.
The purposes of this article are twofold: (a) to clarify the evaluation of the double jeopardy thesis and (b) to evaluate two apparently contradictory sets of results on the double jeopardy to health derived from the same data (National Council on the Aging, 1975). The results offer no support for the double jeopardy thesis based on a subjective assessment of health problems. Both logistic regression analysis and multiple discriminant analysis were used to estimate the relationships among the variables considered.
（a）澄清对双重风险理论的评估；（b）评估从相同数据（美国国家老龄问题委员会，1975年）得出的关于健康双重风险的两组明显相互矛盾的结果。这些结果不支持基于对健康问题主观评估的双重风险理论。逻辑回归分析和多重判别分析都被用来估计所考虑变量之间的关系。
