IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/metron/v80y2022i2d10.1007_s40300-021-00198-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A weighted distance metric for assessing ranking dissimilarity and inter-group heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • Amalia Vanacore

    (University of Naples “Federico II”)

  • Maria Sole Pellegrino

    (University of Naples “Federico II”)

Abstract

In this paper, a weighted variant of the normalized pairwise angular distance metric is proposed. The inclusion of position weights aims at penalizing inversions in the top of the ranking more than inversions in the tail of the ranking. The performance of the proposed weighted distance metric for assessing ranking dissimilarity and its impact on a procedure for testing inter-group heterogeneity have been investigated via a Monte Carlo simulation study under several scenarios—differing for group size, number of ranked alternatives and system of hypotheses—and compared against those obtained for the unweighted variant.

Suggested Citation

  • Amalia Vanacore & Maria Sole Pellegrino, 2022. "A weighted distance metric for assessing ranking dissimilarity and inter-group heterogeneity," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 80(2), pages 175-185, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:metron:v:80:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s40300-021-00198-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40300-021-00198-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40300-021-00198-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40300-021-00198-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Pier Alda Ferrari & Giancarlo Manzi, 2014. "Citizens evaluate public services: a critical overview of statistical methods for analysing user satisfaction," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252, July.
    2. Tamar Gadrich & Emil Bashkansky & Ričardas Zitikis, 2015. "Assessing variation: a unifying approach for all scales of measurement," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1145-1167, May.
    3. Pier Alda Ferrari & Giancarlo Manzi, 2014. "Citizens evaluate public services: a critical overview of statistical methods for analysing user satisfaction," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252, September.
    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. Chica-Olmo, Jorge & Gachs-Sánchez, Héctor & Lizarraga, Carmen, 2018. "Route effect on the perception of public transport services quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 40-48.
    2. Bastianin, Andrea & Castelnovo, Paolo & Florio, Massimo, 2018. "Evaluating regulatory reform of network industries: a survey of empirical models based on categorical proxies," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 115-128.
    3. Giancarlo MANZI & Pier Alda FERRARI, "undated". "Statistical methods for evaluating satisfaction with public services Abstract: Contrary to private enterprises, public enterprises can be unaware of the impact of their performance when providing serv," CIRIEC Working Papers 1404, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    4. Andrea Bastianin & Paolo Castelnovo & Massimo Florio, 2017. "The Empirics of Regulatory Reforms Proxied by Categorical Variables: Recent Findings and Methodological Issues," Working Papers 2017.22, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Xi-Zhang Shan & Xijun Yu, 2014. "Citizen Assessment as Policy Tool of Urban Public Services: Empirical Evidence from Assessments of Urban Green Spaces in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Marius Sorin Dincă & Gheorghiţa Dincă & Maria Letiţia Andronic, 2016. "Efficiency and Sustainability of Local Public Goods and Services. Case Study for Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-24, August.
    7. Musharraf Cyan & Michael Price & Mark Rider, 2017. "Building up Municipal Services from a Scratch: Immediate Gains in Citizen Perceptions and Level of Trust in Militancy Prone Tribal City of North-Western Pakistan," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1706, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    8. Vanacore, Amalia & Pellegrino, Maria Sole, 2021. "Testing inter-group ranking heterogeneity: do patient characteristics matter for prioritization of quality improvements in healthcare service?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    9. Raquel González del Pozo & Luis C. Dias & José Luis García-Lapresta, 2020. "Using Different Qualitative Scales in a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Procedure," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Klein, Ingo & Mangold, Benedikt, 2015. "Cumulative Paired 𝜙-Entropy," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 07/2015, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics.
    11. Yariv N. Marmor & Emil Bashkansky, 2024. "Reliability of Partitioning Metric Space Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, February.
    12. Amalia Vanacore & Maria Sole Pellegrino, 2019. "Checking quality of sensory data via an agreement-based approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(5), pages 2545-2556, September.
    13. Vladimir Turetsky & Emil Bashkansky, 2022. "Ordinal response variation of the polytomous Rasch model," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 80(3), pages 305-330, December.
    14. Stefania Capecchi & Domenico Piccolo, 2017. "Dealing with heterogeneity in ordinal responses," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 2375-2393, September.

    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:spr:metron:v:80:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s40300-021-00198-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.