Pathological	0
Pathological/Reactive	0
Reactive	7
Reactive/Calculative	10
Calculative	10
Calculative/ Proactive	6
Proactive	9
Proactive/Generative	0
Generative	0

this is what I have. Pathological is no presence of
variable....Generative is lots of the variable. the numbers are how
many people thought that that much of the variable is present. I would
like to know if there is a significant difference between the number
of people who rated each variable. I guess... unless you see some more
valuable information that could be gleaned...

I am so lost!

Any help would be much appreciated
Bry

Please tell us more about you data. What is the subject matter area?  
What is a case? What are the variables? Are there subsets of variables?
What do you mean by "variable" in your post?

Is it something like this?
Each case is a person who gave yes or no answers to 5 variables 
(Pathological    Reactive    Calculative    Proactive    Generative) for 
several stimuli.  The stimuli were microscope slides and the 5 questions 
were asked about different bacteria (stimuli).
In response to a stimulus a person "checked or not" all that apply.
for example with 4 stimuli and the 5 variables for  (Pathological    
Reactive    Calculative    Proactive    Generative) there would be 20 
variables in the data.


Art Kendall
Social Research Consultants

Brionny wrote:
> Pathological	0
> Pathological/Reactive	0
> Reactive	7
> Reactive/Calculative	10
> Calculative	10
> Calculative/ Proactive	6
> Proactive	9
> Proactive/Generative	0
> Generative	0
>
> this is what I have. Pathological is no presence of
> variable....Generative is lots of the variable. the numbers are how
> many people thought that that much of the variable is present. I would
> like to know if there is a significant difference between the number
> of people who rated each variable. I guess... unless you see some more
> valuable information that could be gleaned...
>
> I am so lost!
>
> Any help would be much appreciated
> Bry
>   

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:19:33 -0800 (PST), Brionny
<brionnyhooper@gmail.com> wrote:

>Pathological	0
>Pathological/Reactive	0
>Reactive	7
>Reactive/Calculative	10
>Calculative	10
>Calculative/ Proactive	6
>Proactive	9
>Proactive/Generative	0
>Generative	0
>
>this is what I have. Pathological is no presence of
>variable....Generative is lots of the variable. the numbers are how
>many people thought that that much of the variable is present. I would
>like to know if there is a significant difference between the number
>of people who rated each variable. I guess... unless you see some more
>valuable information that could be gleaned...
>
>I am so lost!
>
>Any help would be much appreciated

This is not at all clear, and my guess is different from Art's.
It was helpful to me that Art suggested *some* context -
even if it is the wrong one.

I think that there is an "ordinal" scale represented by 
Pathological, Reactive, Calculative, Proactive and Generative;
and there are 4 more possible "scores" available which consist
of half-way between each of the 5 specific descriptors.  
That is what you mean by saying that the numbers show
"how much of the variable is present"  -- Generative is "a lot" 
and Pathological is "none".

In all, there are 42 scores or ratings, and not *variables*.
 - I must be totally misconstruing everything, if (as Art seems
to be guessing)  the OP actually does mean "variables"  in the 
sense that these are 9 different categories, each of which 
might be independently marked as Yes/No

Now, the only hypothesis that I can figure out seems to
be the rather trivial one, "Is there a uniform distribution
across these levels?"  Well, there are 0 scores in the 4 
extreme categories, and 42 in the middle 5, so the answer
is no. So what?   Should someone bother with a test?
Doesn't the distribution reflect, in some fashion, the manner
of selection of the sample?

I doubt that anyone will be  interested the counts being
unequal, unless there is some important information added 
from somewhere else.  


-- 
Rich Ulrich