Skip to main content
Log in

Correspondence analysis and optimal structural representations

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many well-known measures for the comparison of distinct partitions of the same set ofn objects are based on the structure of class overlap presented in the form of a contingency table (e.g., Pearson's chi-square statistic, Rand's measure, or Goodman-Kruskal'sτ b ), but they all can be rephrased through the use of a simple cross-product index defined between the corresponding entries from twon ×n proximity matrices that provide particular a priori (numerical) codings of the within- and between-class relationships for each of the partitions. We consider the task of optimally constructing the proximity matrices characterizing the partitions (under suitable restriction) so as to maximize the cross-product measure, or equivalently, the Pearson correlation between their entries. The major result presented states that within the broad classes of matrices that are either symmetric, skew-symmetric, or completely arbitrary, optimal representations are already derivable from what is given by a simple one-dimensional correspondence analysis solution. Besides severely limiting the type of structures that might be of interest to consider for representing the proximity matrices, this result also implies that correspondence analysis beyond one dimension must always be justified from logical bases other than the optimization of a single correlational relationship between the matrices representing the two partitions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benzécri, J. P. (1973).L'analyse des données, Volume 1: La taxinomie, Volume 2: L'analyse des correspondances [The analysis of data, Volume 1: Taxonomy, Volume 2: Correspondence analysis]. Paris: Dunod.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. A., & Kruskal, W. H. (1954). Measures of association for cross-classifications.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 732–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenacre, M. (1984).Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayashi, C. (1950). On the quantification of qualitative data from the mathematico-statistical point of view.Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 2, 35–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiser, W. J. (1981).Unfolding analysis of proximity data. Leiden: University of Leiden, Department of Data Theory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiser, W. J., & Meulman, J. (1983). Analyzing rectangular tables by joint and constrained multidimensional scaling.Journal of Econometrics, 22, 139–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. O. (1973). Reciprocal averaging: An eigenvector method of ordination.Journal of Ecology, 61, 237–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. O. (1974). Correspondence analysis: A neglected multivariate method.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C, Applied Statistics, 23, 340–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. O. (1982). Correspondence analysis. In S. Klotz, N. L. Johnson, & C. B. Read (Eds.),Encyclopedia of statistical sciences, Volume 2 (pp. 204–210). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubert, L. J. (1987).Assignment methods in combinatorial data analysis. New York: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubert, L. J., & Arabie, P. (1985). Comparing partitions.Journal of Classification, 2, 193–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubert, L. J., & Arabie, P. (1986). Unidimensional scaling and combinatorial optimization. In J. de Leeuw, W. Heiser, J. Meulman, & F. Critchley (Eds.),Multidimensional data analysis (pp. 181–196). Leiden: DSWO Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebart, L., Morineau, A., & Warwick, K. M. (1984).Multivariate descriptive statistical analysis: Correspondence analysis and related techniques for large matrices (E. M. Berry, Trans.). New York: Wiley. (Original work published in 1977)

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, G. W., & Cooper, M. C. (1986). A study of the comparability of external criteria for hierarchical cluster analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 441–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirkin, B. G. (1979).Group choice (P. C. Fishburn, Ed.: V. Oliker, Trans.). Washington, DC: V. H. Winston. (Original work published in 1974)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishisato, S. (1980).Analysis of categorical data: Dual scaling and its applications. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishisato, S. (1986).Quantification of categorical data: A bibliography 1975–1986. Toronto: Microstats.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgerson, W. S. (1958).Theory and methods of scaling. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This research was supported in part by a grant from American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) to the Industrial Affiliates Program of the University of Illinois. The acting Editor for this manuscript was Shizuhiko Nishisato.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hubert, L., Arabie, P. Correspondence analysis and optimal structural representations. Psychometrika 57, 119–140 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294662

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294662

Key words

Navigation