Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T11:46:18.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two Logit Models for External Analysis of Preferences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Lee G. Cooper  and
Masao Nakanishi
Lee G. Cooper*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Masao Nakanishi
Affiliation:
Kwansei Gakuin University, Japan
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Lee G. Cooper, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles, California, 90024.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A logit vector model and a logit ideal point model are presented for external analysis of paired comparison preference judgments aggregated over a homogeneous group. The logit vector model is hierarchically nested within the logit ideal point model so that statistical tests are available to distinguish between these two models. Generalized least squares estimation procedures are developed to account for heteroscedastic sampling error variances and specification error variances. Two numerical illustrations deal with judgments concerning employee compensation plans and preferences for salt and sugar in the brine of canned green beans.

Keywords

multidimensional scalingexternal analysis of preferencesgeneralized least squares estimation
Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , December 1983 , pp. 607 - 620
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 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

The authors would like to thank Yoshio Takane, Robert J. Meyer and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

References

Reference Note

Carroll, J. D. and Chang, J. J., Relating preference data to multidimensional solutions via a generalization of Coomb's unfolding model. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychometric Society, April, 1967. (Unpublished manuscript, Bell Laboratories, 1967.)Google Scholar

References

Bennett, R. S. and Hays, W. L. Multidimensional unfolding: Determining the dimensionality of ranked preference data. Psychometrika, 1960, 25, 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, R. D. and Jones, L. V. The Measurement and Prediction of Judgment and Choice, San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1968.Google Scholar
Buck, P. A. and Weckel, K. G. Study of consumer preference of salt and sugar levels in canned green beans. Food Technology, 1956, 10, 421–423.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. D. Individual differences and multidimensional scaling. In Shepard, R. N., Romney, A. K. and Nerlove, S. (Eds.), Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications in the Social Sciences. Volume I: Theory . New York: Seminar Press, Inc.. 1972, 105–155.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. D. Models and methods for multidimensional analysis of preferential choice (or other dominance) data. In Lantermann, E. D. and Feger, H. (Eds.), Similarity and Choice: Papers in Honour of Clyde Coombs . Bern: Hans Huber. 1980, 234–289.Google Scholar
Coombs, C. H. A Theory of Data, New York: Wiley, 1964.Google Scholar
Coombs, C. H. A note on the relation between the vector model and the unfolding model for preferences. Psychometrika, 1975, 40, 115–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davison, M. L. Fitting and testing Carroll's weighted unfolding model for preferences. Psychometrika, 1976, 41, 233–247 (a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davison, M. L. External analysis of preferences. Psychometrika, 1976, 41, 557–558 (b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakanishi, M. and Cooper, L. G. Simplified estimation procedures for MCI models. Marketing Science, 1982, 1, 314–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, C. R. Linear Statistical Inference and Its Applications Second Edition, New York: Wiley, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, R. N. Stimulus and response generalization: A stochastic model relating generalization to distance in a psychological space. Psychometrika, 1957, 22, 325–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srinivasan, V. and Shocker, A. D. Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences. Psychometrika, 1973, 38, 337–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yellott, J. I. The relationship between Luce's choice axiom, Thurstone's theory of comparative judgments, and the double exponential distribution. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1977, 15, 109–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar