Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T11:37:06.722Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Analysis of Variance and Pairwise Scaling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Gordon G. Bechtel
Gordon G. Bechtel*
Affiliation:
Oregon Research Institute
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Variance analyses are presented for two data layouts—each corresponding to the class of all ordered pairs from a single finite set. The analysis of the dominance layout is in terms of a fixed effects linear model which includes parameters representing the scale values of the elements of the set, response bias, and pairwise interactions. A parallel parametrization is carried out for the composition layout for which corresponding point estimates and hypothesis tests are given. A joint treatment of concurrently observed dominance and composition layouts is suggested and illustrative data are presented.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 1967 , pp. 47 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grant MH-04439-06. The author would like to express his appreciation to Richard Beatty of the University of Toronto, James Baker and William Carroll of Oregon Research Institute, and J. E. Keith Smith of the University of Michigan, for their helpful comments concerning aspects of this work. Computing assistance was obtained from the Health Sciences Computing Facility, UCLA, sponsored by NIH Grant FR-3.

References

Binder, A. Statistical theory. Ann. Rev. Psychol., 1964, 15, 277–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coombs, C. H. A theory of data, New York: Wiley, 1964.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. and Gleser, Goldine Assessing similarity between profiles. Psychological Bulletin, 1953, 50, 456–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
David, H. A. The method of paired comparisons. In Kendall, M. G. (Eds.), Griffin's statistical monographs and courses, No. 12, New York: Hafner, 1963.Google Scholar
Edwards, W. The theory of decision making. Psychol. Bull., 1954, 51, 380–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, W. Behavioral decision theory. Ann. Rev. Psychol., 1961, 12, 473–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ekman, G. and Sjöberg, L. Scaling. Ann. Rev. Psychol., 1965, 16, 451–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodman, N. The structure of appearance, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1951.Google Scholar
Harris, W. P. A revised law of comparative judgment. Psychometrika, 1957, 22, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, M. C. Interactions, configurations, and nonadditive models. Educ. and Psychol. Measmt., 1961, 21, 797–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lev, J. and Kinder, E. F. New analysis of variance formulas for treating data from mutually paired subjects. Psychometrika, 1957, 22, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quenouille, H. M. Design and analysis of experiments, New York: Hafner, 1953.Google Scholar
Scheffé, H. An analysis of variance for paired comparisons. J. of Amer. Statist. Assn., 1952, 47, 381–400.Google Scholar
Scheffé, H. The analysis of variance, New York: Wiley, 1959.Google Scholar
Torgerson, W. S. Theory and methods of scaling, New York: Wiley, 1958.Google Scholar
Tucker, L. R. and Messick, S. An individual differences model for multidimensional scaling. Psychometrika, 1963, 28, 333–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, F. Analysis of data from all possible reciprocal crosses between a set of parental lines. Heredity, 1947, 1, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar