Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On choosing the appropriate measure of association when analyzing rating scale data

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper reviewed the current state of the literature on the appropriateness of various correlation measures when data are ordinal. Emphasis was on the use of these measures as input to multivariate analysis. Based on the review, four correlation indexes were further studied via a simulation design. The simulation results indicated that the polychoric correlation outperformed product-moment, Spearman’s rho and Kendall’s tau-b measures on the basis of bias and squared error criteria. The present study suggests that the chapter investigating pairwise correlations may be closed and attention may now be directed towards non-normal data and actual multivariate analysis with correlation matrices.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allan, G. J. Borris. 1976. “Ordinal-scaled variables and multi-variate analysis: comment on Hawkes.”American Journal of Sociology 81:1498–1500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatta, E. F. and G. F. Bohrnstedt. 1981. “Levels of Measurement: Once Over Again.” InSocial Measurement: Current Issues. Ed. G. W. Bohrnstedt and E. F. Borgatta, eds., Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, C. J. 1970. “Measurement Scales and Statistical Models.” InScaling: A Sourcebook for Behavioral Scientists, Chicago: Aldine: 42–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, John B. 1961. “The Nature of Data, or How to Choose a Correlation Coefficient.”Psychometrika 26: 347–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, Raymond B. 1978.The Scientific use of Factor Analysis in Behavioral and Life Sciences. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. Louise. 1984. “Robustness of One Way Analysis of Variance for Ordinal Data.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The University of Alabama.

  • Costner, H. L. 1965. “Criteria for Measures of Association,” American Sociological Review 30: 341,353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaito, J. 1980. “Measurement Scales and Statistics: Resurgence of an Old Misconception.”Psychological Bulletin 87: 564–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, J. D. 1971.Nonparametric Statistical Inference. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1976.Nonparametric Methods for Quantitative Analysis. New York. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, Leo A. and William H. Kruskal. 1954. “Measurement of Association for Cross Classifications.”Journal of the American Statistical Association 49:723–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. 1955. “The Determinancy of Factor Score Matrices with Implications for Five Other Basic Problems of Common Factor Theory.”The British Journal of Statistical Psychology 8: 65–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1981. “What is not What in Statistics.” InMultidimensional Data Representations: When and Why. Ed. I. Borg. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Mathesis: 20–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havlicek, Larry L. and Nancy L. Peterson. 1977. “Effect of Violation of Assumptions Upon Significance Levels of the Pearson r.”Psychological Bulletin: 373–377.

  • Hawkes, Ronald K. 1971. “The Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Measures.”American Journal of Sociology 76: 908–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hays, William L. 1981.Statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Third Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, Frank. 1982. “Multivariate Analysis and Ordinal Data.”American Sociological Review 47: 299–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horst, Paul. 1965.Factor Analysis of Data Matrices. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMSL. 1981.International Mathematical and Statistical Libraries. Houston: IMSL, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janson, S. and J. Vegelius. 1982. “Correlation Coefficients for More Than on Scale Type.”Multivariate Behavioral Research 17: 274–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G. 1979. “A General Approach to Confirmatory Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis with Addendum.” InAdvances in Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Models. Ed. Jay Madigson. Cambridge: Abt: 21–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Dag Sörbom. 1981.LISREL: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood (Version V). Chicago: National Educational Resources, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, Maurice G. 1955.Rank Correlation Methods, Second edition. New York: Hafner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Jae On. 1975. “Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Variables.”American Journal of Sociology 81: 261–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1978. “Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Variables Revisited.”American Journal of Sociology 84: 448–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruskal, William H. 1958. “Ordinal Measures of Association.”Journal of the American Statistical Association 53: 814–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labovitz, S. 1967. “Some Observations on Measurement and Statistics.”Social Forces 46:151–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1970. “The Assignment of Numbers Rank Order Categories.”American Sociological Review 35: 515–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawley, D. N. and A. E. Maxwell. 1971.Factor Analysis as a Statistical Method. London: Butterworths.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lord, F. M. 1953. “On the Statistical Treatment of Football Numbers.”American Psychologist 8: 750–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martilla, John A. and Davis W. Carvey. 1975. “Four Subtle Sins in Marketing Research.”Journal of Marketing 39: 8–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Warren S. 1973. “The Effects of Scaling on the Correlation Coefficients: A Test of Validity.”Journal of Marketing Research 10: 326–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1978. “Effects of Scaling on the Correlation Coefficients: Additional Considerations.”Journal of Marketing Research 15: 304–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, Donald G. and Normal E. Toy. 1982. “The Effect of Grouping Continuous Variables on Correlation Coefficients.”Marketing Science 1: 379–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. 1970.Introduction to Psychological Measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, R. M. 1979. “The Use of Pearson’s r With Ordinal Data.”American Sociological Review 36: 519–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1981. “Using Rank Category Variables to Represent Continuous Variables: Defects of Common Practice.”Social Forces 59: 1149–1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, Ulf. 1979. “Maximum Likelihood Estimation of the Polychoric Correlation Coefficient.”Psychometrika 44: 443–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1980. “Measuring Correlation in Ordered Two-Way Contingency Tables.”Journal of Marketing Research 17 (August): 391–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, C. C. and W. R. Van Voorhis. 1940.Statistical Procedures and Their Mathematical Bases. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, Robert A. and Subhash Sharma. 1977. “Adjusting Correlation Coefficients for the Effects of Scaling,” InProceedings of the Business and Economics Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association.

  • Ploch, D. H. 1974. “Ordinal Measures of Association and General Linear Model.” InMeasurement in the Social Sciences, Ed. H. M. Blalock, Jr. Chicago: Aldine: 343–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, Henry. 1973. “On The Multivariate Analysis of Ordinal Measures.”American Journal of Sociology 78: 1513–1516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roskam, Edward E. 1979. “Data Theory and Mathematical Models.” InGeometric Representations of Relational Data. Ed. J. C. Lingoes at al. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Mathesis: 149–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Robert B. 1971. “Neighborhood Context and College Plans: An Ordinal Path Analysis.”Social Forces 51: 199–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somers, Robert H. 1974. “Analysis of Partial Rank Correlation Measures Based on the Product-Moment Model: Part One.”Social Forces 53: 229–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SPSSX. 1983.Statistical Package for the Social Sciences: User Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • SSP. 1968.Scientific Subroutine Package. Version III, Fourth Edition. IBM Corporation.

  • Stevens, S. S. 1951. “Mathematics, Measurement, and Psychophysics.” InHandbook of Experimental Psychology. Ed. S. S. Stevens. New York: Wiley: 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1968. “Measurement, Statistics, and the Schemaphiric View.”Science 161: 849–856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wainer Howard and David Thissen. 1976. “Three Steps Towards Robust Regression.”Psychometrika 41: 9–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. P. 1969. “A Proportional-Reduction-In-Error Interpretation for Kendall’s tau-b.”Social Forces 47: 340–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1971. “Critique of Ordinal Variables.”Social Forces 49: 432–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1974a. “On Ordinal Path Analysis: Reply to Smith’s Neighborhood Context and College Plans’”Social Forces 53: 120–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1974b. “Reply to Somers and Smith”.Social Forces 53: 247–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Emin Babakus

    Present address: Memphis State University, Memphis, USA

  2. Carl E. Ferguson

    Present address: University of Alabama, Birmingham, USA

Authors and Affiliations

    Authors
    1. Emin Babakus
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Carl E. Ferguson
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Cite this article

    Babakus, E., Ferguson, C.E. On choosing the appropriate measure of association when analyzing rating scale data. JAMS 16, 95–102 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723328

    Download citation

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723328

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation