Abstract
The slide-vector scaling model attempts to account for the asymmetry of a proximity matrix by a uniform shift in a fixed direction imposed on a symmetric Euclidean representation of the scaled objects. Although no method for fitting the slide-vector model seems available in the literature, the model can be viewed as a constrained version of the unfolding model, which does suggest one possible algorithm. The slide-vector model is generalized to handle three-way data, and two examples from market structure analysis are presented.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
References
Carroll, J. D. (1972). Individual differences and multidimensional scaling. In R. N. Shepard, A. K. Romney, & S. B. Nerlove (Eds.),Multidimensional scaling: Theory and applications in the behavioral sciences (pp. 105–155). New York: Seminar Press.
Carroll, J. D. (1981). Models and methods for multidimensional analysis of preferential choice (or other dominance) data. In E. D. Lantermann & H. Feger (Eds.),Similarity and choice (pp. 234–289). Bern: Huber.
Carroll, J. D., & Chang, J. J. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via anN-way generalization of “Eckart-Young” decomposition.Psychometrika, 35, 283–319.
Carroll, J. D., & Wish, M. (1974). Multidimensional perceptual models and measurement methods. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Handbook of perception (pp. 391–447). New York: Academic Press.
Caussinus, H. (1965). Contribution a l'analyse statstique des tableaux de correlation. [Contributions to the statistical analysis of correlation matrices].Annals of the Faculty of Science, University of Toulouse, 29, 77–182.
Constantine, A. G., & Gower, J. C. (1978). Graphical representation of asymmetric matrices.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C, 27, 297–304.
Coxon, A. P. M. (1982).The user's guide to multidimensional scaling. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
de Leeuw, J. (1988). Convergence of the majorization method for multidimensional scaling.Journal of Classification, 5, 163–180.
de Leeuw, J., & Heiser, W. (1980). Multidimensional scaling with restrictions on the configuration. In P. R. Krishnaiah (Ed.),Multivariate analysis-V (pp. 501–522). Amsterdam: North Holland.
de Leeuw, J., & Heiser, W. J. (1982). Theory of multidimensional scaling. In P. R. Krishnaiah & L. N. Kanal (Eds.),Handbook of statistics, Vol. 2 (pp. 285–316). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Gower, J. C. (1977). The analysis of asymmetry and orthogonality. In J. R. Barra, F. Brodeau, G. Romer, & B. van Cutsem (Eds.),Recent developments in statistics (pp. 109–123). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Harshman, R. A., Green, P. E., Wind, Y., & Lundy, M. E. (1982). A model for the analysis of asymmetric data in marketing research.Marketing Science, 1, 204–242.
Heiser, W. J. (1987). Joint ordination of species and sites: the unfolding technique. In P. Legendre & L. Legendre (Eds.),Developments in numerical ecology (pp. 189–221). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Heiser, W. J., & Meulman, J. (1983a). Analyzing rectangular tables by joint and constrained multidimensional scaling.Journal of Econometrics, 22, 139–167.
Heiser, W. J., & Meulman, J. (1983b). Constrained multidimensional scaling, including confirmation.Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 381–404.
Heiser, W. J., & Stoop, I. (1986).Explicit SMACOF algorithms for individual differences scaling (Research Report RR-86-14). Leiden: University of Leiden, Department of Data Theory.
Holman, E. W. (1979). Monotonic models for asymmetric proximities.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 20, 1–15.
Keeren, G., & Baggen, S. (1981). Recognition models of alphanumeric characters.Perception and Psychophysics, 29, 234–246.
Krumhansl, C. L. (1978). Concerning the applicability of geometric models to similarity data: The interrelationship between similarity and spatial density.Psychological Review, 84, 445–463.
Kruskal, J. B. (1964a). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis.Psychometrika, 29, 1–27.
Kruskal, J. B. (1964b). Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method.Psychometrika, 29, 115–129.
Meulman, J., & Heiser, W. J. (1984). Constrained multidimensional scaling: More directions than dimensions. In T. Havránek, Z. Šidák, & M. Novák (Eds.),Compstat 1984, Proceedings in computational statistics (pp. 51–56). Vienna: Physica Verlag.
Milligan, G. W. (1980). An examination of the effect of six types of error perturbation on fifteen clustering algorithms.Psychometrika, 45, 325–342.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1991). Stimulus bias, asymmetric similarity, and classification.Cognitive Psychology, 23, 94–140.
Okada, A. (1988a). Asymmetric multidimensional scaling of car switching data. In W. Gaul & M. Schader (Eds.),Data, expert knowledge and decisions (pp. 279–290). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Okada, A. (1988b). An analysis of intergenerational occupational mobility by asymmetric multidimensional scaling.Proceedings of the SMABS 88 Conference (pp. 1–15). Groningen: University of Groningen.
Tobler, W. R., & Wineburg, S. (1971). A Cappadocian speculation.Nature, 231, 39–42.
Weeks, D. G., & Bentler, P. M. (1982). Restricted multidimensional scaling models for asymmetric proximities.Psychometrika, 47, 201–208.
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity.Psychological Review, 84, 327–352.
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors wish to thank Ivo van der Lans, John Gower, and the Editor for their comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zielman, B., Heiser, W.J. Analysis of asymmetry by a slide-vector. Psychometrika 58, 101–114 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294474
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
Key words
- slide-vector model
- unfolding
- constrained multidimensional scaling
- asymmetry