Analysing partial ranks by using smoothed paired comparison methods: an investigation of value orientation in Europe

This paper introduces the paired comparison model as a suitable approach for the analysis of partially ranked data. For example, the Inglehart index, collected in international social surveys to examine shifts in post-materialistic values, generates such data on a set of attitude items. However, current analysis methods have failed to account for the complex shifts in individual item values, or to incorporate subject covariates. The paired comparison model is thus developed to allow for covariate subject effects at the individual level, and a reparameterization allows the inclusion of smooth non-linear effects of continuous covariates. The Inglehart index collected in the 1993 International Social Science Programme survey is analysed, and complex non-linear changes of item values with age, level of education and religion are identified. The model proposed provides a powerful tool for social scientists. Copyright 2002 Royal Statistical Society.

[1]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  Rank Analysis of Incomplete Block Designs: I. The Method of Paired Comparisons , 1952 .

[2]  C. Sinclair,et al.  GLIM for Preference , 1982 .

[3]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNS THE METHOD OF PAIRED COMPARISONS , 1952 .

[4]  Richard D. Deveaux,et al.  Applied Smoothing Techniques for Data Analysis , 1999, Technometrics.

[5]  Walter Katzenbeisser,et al.  The analysis of rank ordered preference data based on Bradley-Terry Type Models Die Analyse von Präferenzdaten mit Hilfe von log-linearen Bradley-Terry Modellen , 2000, OR Spectr..

[6]  Douglas E. Critchlow,et al.  Ranking Models with Item Covariates , 1993 .

[7]  Alan Agresti,et al.  Analysis of Ordinal Paired Comparison Data , 1992 .

[8]  Regina Dittrich,et al.  Modelling the effect of subject‐specific covariates in paired comparison studies with an application to university rankings , 2001 .

[9]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Cross-task validity comparisons of stated preference choice models , 1993 .

[10]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNS , 1952 .

[11]  Alan Marsh.  The “Silent Revolution,” Value Priorities, and the Quality of Life in Britain , 1975, American Political Science Review.

[12]  J. Matthews,et al.  An application of Bradley-Terry-type models to the measurement of pain , 1995 .

[13]  C. E. Rogers,et al.  Symbolic Description of Factorial Models for Analysis of Variance , 1973 .

[14]  Michael Green,et al.  The GLIM system : release 4 manual , 1993 .

[15]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Generalized additive models for medical research , 1986, Statistical methods in medical research.

[16]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Some New Methods for an Old Problem: Modeling Preference Changes and Competitive Market Structures in Pretest Market Data: , 1997 .

[17]  Thomas A. Herz.  Werte, sozio-politische Konflikte und Generationen , 1987 .

[18]  C. L. Mallows.  NON-NULL RANKING MODELS. I , 1957 .

[19]  C. Bean,et al.  POLARIZED PRIORITIES OR FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVES? DIMENSIONALITY IN INGLEHART'S MATERIALISM—POSTMATERIALISM SCALE , 1994 .

[20]  K. Mannheim,et al.  Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge , 1953 .

[21]  R. Inglehart.  The Silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics , 1977 .

[22]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[23]  Scott C. Flanagan.  Changing Values in Advanced Industrial Societies , 1982 .

[24]  R. Jowell,et al.  International Social Attitudes: The 10th Bsa Report , 1995 .

[25]  Randall G. Chapaaan,et al.  Exploiting Rank Ordered Choice Set Data within the Stochastic Utility Model , 1982 .

[26]  Chih-Ling Tsai,et al.  Semiparametric and Additive Model Selection Using an Improved Akaike Information Criterion , 1999 .