Computational Statistics and Data Analysis Two Types of Single-peaked Data: Correspondence Analysis as an Alternative to Principal Component Analysis

It has been argued that principal component analysis (PCA) is not appropriate for analyzing data conforming to single-peaked response models, also referred to as unfolding models. An overview of these findings is given, which relates them to the distinction between two types of unfolding models; namely, models that are either a quadratic function of the person-to-item distances or an exponential function of these distances. This distinction is easy to recognize empirically because the inter-item correlation matrix for the two types of data typically shows different patterns. Furthermore, for both types of unfolding models, correspondence analysis (CA), which is a rival method for dimensionality reduction, outperforms PCA in terms of representation of both person and item locations, especially for the exponential unfolding model. Finally, it is shown that undoubled CA outperforms doubled CA for both types of unfolding models. It is argued that performing CA on the raw data matrix is an unconventional, but meaningful approach to scaling items and persons on an underlying unfolding scale. A real data example on personality assessment is given, which shows that for this type of data (undoubled) CA is to be preferred over PCA.

[1]  I. Jolliffe,et al.  Nonlinear Multivariate Analysis , 1992 .

[2]  Richard C. W. Kao,et al.  On a connection between factor analysis and multidimensional unfolding , 1960 .

[3]  Michael Greenacre,et al.  Tying up the loose ends in simple, multiple, joint correspondence analysis , 2006 .

[4]  D. Andrich,et al.  The structural relationship between attitude and behavior statements from the unfolding perspective. , 1998 .

[5]  M. Hill,et al.  Nonlinear Multivariate Analysis. , 1990 .

[6]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  Partial canonical correspondence analysis , 1988 .

[7]  M. Greenacre Correspondence Analysis in Practice, Second Edition , 2007 .

[8]  C. Braak,et al.  Unimodal models to relate species to environment , 1988 .

[9]  A. D. Gordon,et al.  Correspondence Analysis Handbook. , 1993 .

[10]  Brian Everitt,et al.  Homogeneity analysis of incomplete data , 1986 .

[11]  Michael Greenacre,et al.  Tying Up the Loose Ends in Simple Correspondence Analysis , 2001 .

[12]  N. Smelser,et al.  International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences , 2001 .

[13]  Michael D. Maraun,et al.  The Extra-Factor Phenomenon Revisited: Unidimensional Unfolding as Quadratic Factor Analysis , 2001 .

[14]  N. Cliff,et al.  A generalization of the interpoint distance model , 1964 .

[15]  M. D. Martínez-Miranda,et al.  Computational Statistics and Data Analysis , 2009 .

[16]  P. Schönemann ON METRIC MULTIDIMENSIONAL UNFOLDING , 1970 .

[17]  M. Hill,et al.  Reciprocal Averaging : an eigenvector method of ordination , 1973 .

[18]  Douglas H. Wedell,et al.  Validity Issues in the Likert and Thurstone Approaches to Attitude Measurement , 1999 .

[19]  Michel van de Velden Optimal Scaling of Paired Comparison Data , 2004, J. Classif..

[20]  R. Clarke,et al.  Theory and Applications of Correspondence Analysis , 1985 .

[21]  David Andrich,et al.  A hyperbolic cosine latent trait model for unfolding polytomous responses: Reconciling Thurstone and Likert methodologies , 1996 .

[22]  Wijbrandt H. Schuur,et al.  Measuring subjective well-being: Unfolding the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale , 1995 .

[23]  Mike P. Austin,et al.  Principal Component Ordination and Simulated Vegetational Data , 1970 .

[24]  T. Hastie,et al.  Constrained ordination analysis with flexible response functions , 2005 .

[25]  G. De’ath PRINCIPAL CURVES: A NEW TECHNIQUE FOR INDIRECT AND DIRECT GRADIENT ANALYSIS , 1999 .

[26]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  A Theory of Gradient Analysis , 2004 .

[27]  M. Hill Correspondence Analysis: A Neglected Multivariate Method , 1974 .

[28]  M. Hill,et al.  Detrended correspondence analysis: An improved ordination technique , 2004, Vegetatio.

[29]  M. Greenacre Correspondence analysis in practice , 1993 .

[30]  J. Rost,et al.  Applications of Latent Trait and Latent Class Models in the Social Sciences , 1998 .

[31]  Juyoung Kim,et al.  A Gravity‐Based Multidimensional Scaling Model for Deriving Spatial Structures Underlying Consumer Preference/Choice Judgments , 2002 .

[32]  J. S. Roberts,et al.  A General Item Response Theory Model for Unfolding Unidimensional Polytomous Responses , 2000 .

[33]  C. Braak Correspondence Analysis of Incidence and Abundance Data:Properties in Terms of a Unimodal Response Model , 1985 .

[34]  J. M. A. Swan,et al.  An Examination of Some Ordination Problems By Use of Simulated Vegetational Data , 1970 .

[35]  Phipps Arabie,et al.  The Representation of Symmetric Proximity Data: Dimensions and Classifications , 1998, Comput. J..

[36]  Mark L. Davison,et al.  On a metric, unidimensional unfolding model for attitudinal and developmental data , 1977 .

[37]  Henk A. L. Kiers,et al.  Why Factor Analysis Often is the Incorrect Model for Analyzing Bipolar Concepts, and What Model to Use Instead , 1994 .

[38]  H. Van,et al.  The developmental profile. , 2001, Journal of personality disorders.

[39]  C. Coombs A theory of data. , 1965, Psychology Review.

[40]  Hans-Hermann Bock,et al.  Classification and Related Methods of Data Analysis , 1988 .