In this respect, the introduction of alternatives "in University" is not entirely correct because it describes a wider range of phenomena: along with the professional Institute and gives General higher education. The Respondent sees the latter alternative as a broader concept, which often leads to double the answers, because he is forced to choose one alternative within the conceptual content of the question (which it has trained) and the second alternative in the framework of a more General concept (which he has a General education) that leads to the displacement of the indicator of vocational education. If the workplace employs a large number of workers with secondary special and higher education (at present such workers there are from 10 to 30%), this may lead to significant distortion of information. In the totality of the answers (if dual responses) number of trained may be much larger than it actually is.
The requirement to limit the scope of the concepts of alternatives often is in conflict with a different methodological requirement - a limitation of the quality of the alternatives in question. However, the latter inevitably leads in many cases to increase the scope of the concepts of alternatives and a higher level of generality. The desire to reduce the level of community, a reduction concepts have the consequence of increasing the number of alternatives in question. Thus, the question of the existence of a particular literature in the home library, the number of alternatives increases with the reduction of concepts: artistic, social, political, scientific, special, academic, reference etc.
The resolution of this contradiction depends on the correct development of the conceptual content of the question, i.e. the formulation of its conceptual content, a certain level of commonality that determines the level of generality of its alternatives.
2. Alternatives have a low level of generality, are of a private nature and the volume of a set they are not exhaustive of the scope of the concept issue.
![]()
The requirement to limit the scope of the concepts of alternatives often is in conflict with a different methodological requirement - a limitation of the quality of the alternatives in question. However, the latter inevitably leads in many cases to increase the scope of the concepts of alternatives and a higher level of generality. The desire to reduce the level of community, a reduction concepts have the consequence of increasing the number of alternatives in question. Thus, the question of the existence of a particular literature in the home library, the number of alternatives increases with the reduction of concepts: artistic, social, political, scientific, special, academic, reference etc.
The resolution of this contradiction depends on the correct development of the conceptual content of the question, i.e. the formulation of its conceptual content, a certain level of commonality that determines the level of generality of its alternatives.
2. Alternatives have a low level of generality, are of a private nature and the volume of a set they are not exhaustive of the scope of the concept issue.