Abstract
The data for MDS, proximities, are discussed. Proximities can be collected directly as judgments of similarity; proximities can be derived from data vectors; proximities may result from converting other indexes; and co-occurrence data are yet another popular form of proximities.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For other forms of standardization, the results are essentially the same. For example, when turning the variables first into z-scores (with mean zero and \(sd=1\)), Eq. (4.1) changes to \(const= \sqrt{2N}\). Note, however, that when you compute a product-moment correlation, you implicitly standardize your variables. If that makes sense, you should also standardize them before computing distances, but then using correlations or distances does not make a difference in ordinal MDS.
- 2.
An R-function, dist.binary(), for computing ten different S-coefficients—including \(S_2\), \(S_3\), and \(S_4\) – among the columns of a binary data matrix can be found at https://rdrr.io/rforge/ade4/src/R/dist.binary.R.
- 3.
If you have many cases of no co-occurrence, then your dissimilarity matrix becomes very sparse. Then, of course, MDS may become rather arbitrary, producing fancy configurations based on almost no data.
References
Bilsky, W., Borg, I., & Wetzels, P. (1994). Assessing connfict tactics in close relationships: A reanlysis of a research instrument. In J. J. Hox, P. G. Swanborn, & G. J. Mellenbergh (Eds.), Facet theory: Analysis and design (pp. 39–46). Zeist, The Netherlands: Setos.
Borg, I. (1988). Revisiting Thurstone’s and Coombs’ scales on the seriousness of crimes and offences. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 53–61.
Borg, I., & Groenen, P. J. F. (2005). Modern multidimensional scaling (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
Cox, T. F., & Cox, M. A. A. (2000). Multidimensional scaling (2nd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall.
Coxon, A. P. M., & Jones, C. L. (1978). The images of occupational prestige: A study in social cognition. London: Macmillan.
England, G., & Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A. (1994). How working is defined: Structure and stability. In I. Borg & S. Dolan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Work and Organizational Values (pp. 104–113). Montreal: ISSWOV.
Glushko, R. J. (1975). Pattern goodness and redundancy revisited: Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical clustering analyses. Perception & Psychophysics, 17, 158–162.
Gower, J. C. (1985). Measures of similarity, dissimilarity, and distance. In S. Kotz, N. L. Johnson, & C. B. Read (Eds.), Encyclopedia of statistical sciences (Vol. 5, pp. 397–405). New York: Wiley.
Graef, J., & Spence, I. (1979). Using distance information in the design of large multidimensional scaling experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 60–66.
Green, P. E., & Wind, Y. (1973). Multivariate decisions in marketing: A measurement approach. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden.
Mair, P., Rusch, T., & Hornik, K. (2014). The grand old party: A party of values? SpringerPlus, 3(697), 1–10.
Restle, F. (1959). A metric and an ordering on sets. Psychometrika, 24, 207–220.
Spence, I., & Domoney, D. W. (1974). Single subject incomplete designs for nonmetric multidimensional scaling. Psychometrika, 39, 469–490.
Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273–286.
Tobler, W., & Wineburg, S. (1971). A cappadocian speculation. Nature, 231, 39–41.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Borg, I., Groenen, P.J.F., Mair, P. (2018). Proximities. In: Applied Multidimensional Scaling and Unfolding. SpringerBriefs in Statistics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73471-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73471-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73470-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73471-2
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)