IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v54y2010i10p2343-2357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Representation of individual differences in rectangular proximity data through anti-Q matrix decomposition

Author

Listed:
  • Köhn, Hans-Friedrich

Abstract

Decomposition of a rectangular proximity matrix into a sum of equal-sized matrices, each constrained to display a certain order pattern, called an anti-Q form, can be interpreted as a less restrictive analogue of singular value decomposition. Both decomposition techniques share the ultimate goal of identifying a parsimonious representation of the original matrix in the form of an approximation through a small sum of components. The specific patterning of the extracted anti-Q matrices lends to subsequent analyses steps (by treating each anti-Q component as a separate proximity matrix), and representations as a discrete two-mode ultrametric or a continuous unidimensional unfolding. Because both models entail the same number of estimated weights, a direct comparison of their fit values can be carried out. Thus, for each extracted anti-Q matrix we can distinguish whether a categorical (discrete) or a dimensional structure provides the better representation. A generalization of anti-Q decomposition is proposed to a cube formed by rectangular proximity matrices observed from multiple data sources, and therefore, as a way of representing individual differences. In addressing this task within a 'deviation-from-the-mean paradigm', the individual proximity matrices are decomposed against a reference structure derived from the aggregate body of data. Assessment of overall agreement with the reference structure for each data source, as well as discrete and continuous representations fit to each extracted confirmatory anti-Q matrix, provide a detailed inter- and intra-individual analysis of the predominate characterization of the relationships between row and column objects. As an illustrative application, we analyze criterion-based rankings given by males and females for various contraceptive measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Köhn, Hans-Friedrich, 2010. "Representation of individual differences in rectangular proximity data through anti-Q matrix decomposition," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(10), pages 2343-2357, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:54:y:2010:i:10:p:2343-2357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(10)00114-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geert Soete & Wayne DeSarbo & George Furnas & J. Carroll, 1984. "The estimation of ultrametric and path length trees from rectangular proximity data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 289-310, September.
    2. Jacqueline Meulman & Peter Verboon, 1993. "Points of view analysis revisited: Fitting multidimensional structures to optimal distance components with cluster restrictions on the variables," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 7-35, March.
    3. Suzanne Winsberg & Geert Soete, 1993. "A latent class approach to fitting the weighted Euclidean model, clascal," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 58(2), pages 315-330, June.
    4. Kohn, Hans-Friedrich, 2006. "Combinatorial individual differences scaling within the city-block metric," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 931-946, November.
    5. J. Carroll & Jih-Jie Chang, 1970. "Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of “Eckart-Young” decomposition," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(3), pages 283-319, September.
    6. J. Fernando Vera & Willem J. Heiser & Alex Murillo, 2007. "Global Optimization in Any Minkowski Metric: A Permutation-Translation Simulated Annealing Algorithm for Multidimensional Scaling," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 24(2), pages 277-301, September.
    7. J. Carroll & Linda Clark & Wayne DeSarbo, 1984. "The representation of three-way proximity data by single and multiple tree structure models," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 1(1), pages 25-74, December.
    8. Michael Brusco, 2002. "A branch-and-bound algorithm for fitting anti-robinson structures to symmetric dissimilarity matrices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 459-471, September.
    9. Michael Brusco & Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Stephanie Stahl, 2008. "Heuristic Implementation of Dynamic Programming for Matrix Permutation Problems in Combinatorial Data Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(3), pages 503-522, September.
    10. Michael J. Brusco, 2001. "A Simulated Annealing Heuristic for Unidimensional and Multidimensional (City-Block) Scaling of Symmetric Proximity Matrices," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 18(1), pages 3-33, January.
    11. Carl Eckart & Gale Young, 1936. "The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 1(3), pages 211-218, September.
    12. Lawrence Hubert & Phipps Arabie & Jacqueline Meulman, 1998. "Graph-theoretic representations for proximity matrices through strongly-anti-Robinson or circular strongly-anti-Robinson matrices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 341-358, December.
    13. J. Carroll, 1976. "Spatial, non-spatial and hybrid models for scaling," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 439-463, December.
    14. Lawrence Hubert & Phipps Arabie, 1995. "The approximation of two-mode proximity matrices by sums of order-constrained matrices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 573-605, December.
    15. Ledyard Tucker & Samuel Messick, 1963. "An individual differences model for multidimensional scaling," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 28(4), pages 333-367, December.
    16. de Leeuw, Jan & Mair, Patrick, 2009. "Multidimensional Scaling Using Majorization: SMACOF in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 31(i03).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kohn, Hans-Friedrich, 2006. "Combinatorial individual differences scaling within the city-block metric," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 931-946, November.
    2. Willem Heiser, 2013. "In memoriam, J. Douglas Carroll 1939–2011," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 5-13, January.
    3. J. Vera & Rodrigo Macías & Willem Heiser, 2009. "A Latent Class Multidimensional Scaling Model for Two-Way One-Mode Continuous Rating Dissimilarity Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 297-315, June.
    4. Dawn Iacobucci & Doug Grisaffe & Wayne DeSarbo, 2017. "Statistical perceptual maps: using confidence region ellipses to enhance the interpretations of brand positions in multidimensional scaling," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(3), pages 81-98, December.
    5. Stephen L. France & Wen Chen & Yumin Deng, 2017. "ADCLUS and INDCLUS: analysis, experimentation, and meta-heuristic algorithm extensions," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 11(2), pages 371-393, June.
    6. Groenen, P.J.F. & Borg, I., 2013. "The Past, Present, and Future of Multidimensional Scaling," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2013-07, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    7. John C. Gower & Niël J. Le Roux & Sugnet Gardner-Lubbe, 2022. "Properties of individual differences scaling and its interpretation," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 63(4), pages 1221-1245, August.
    8. Wedel, M. & Bijmolt, T.H.A., 1998. "Mixed Tree and Spatial Representation of Dissimilarity Judgments," Discussion Paper 1998-109, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Henk Kiers, 1991. "Hierarchical relations among three-way methods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 449-470, September.
    10. Douglas Clarkson & Richard Gonzalez, 2001. "Random effects diagonal metric multidimensional scaling models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 25-43, March.
    11. Yoshio Takane & Forrest Young & Jan Leeuw, 1977. "Nonmetric individual differences multidimensional scaling: An alternating least squares method with optimal scaling features," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 42(1), pages 7-67, March.
    12. Michael J. Brusco & Douglas Steinley & Ashley L. Watts, 2022. "Disentangling relationships in symptom networks using matrix permutation methods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(1), pages 133-155, March.
    13. Geert Soete & Willem Heiser, 1993. "A latent class unfolding model for analyzing single stimulus preference ratings," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 545-565, December.
    14. Peter Schönemann, 1970. "On metric multidimensional unfolding," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(3), pages 349-366, September.
    15. Michael Brusco & Stephanie Stahl, 2005. "Optimal Least-Squares Unidimensional Scaling: Improved Branch-and-Bound Procedures and Comparison to Dynamic Programming," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 253-270, June.
    16. Julius Žilinskas, 2012. "Parallel branch and bound for multidimensional scaling with city-block distances," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 261-274, October.
    17. Simon Blanchard & Wayne DeSarbo, 2013. "A New Zero-Inflated Negative Binomial Methodology for Latent Category Identification," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 322-340, April.
    18. Michael Brusco, 2002. "A branch-and-bound algorithm for fitting anti-robinson structures to symmetric dissimilarity matrices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 459-471, September.
    19. Jos Berge & Henk Kiers, 1991. "Some clarifications of the CANDECOMP algorithm applied to INDSCAL," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 317-326, June.
    20. Richard Sands & Forrest Young, 1980. "Component models for three-way data: An alternating least squares algorithm with optimal scaling features," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 45(1), pages 39-67, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:54:y:2010:i:10:p:2343-2357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.