LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (October 2002)Back to main SPSSX-L pageJoin or leave SPSSX-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:43:38 -0700
Reply-To:     Michael Healy <healym@earthlink.net>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Michael Healy <healym@earthlink.net>
Subject:      Statistical Questions about MDS/INDSCAL
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Hello SPSS list readers, I have a statistical question about MDS/INDSCAL modeling I hope that this list might be able to help me with.

I obtained a matrix unconditional INDSCAL model that recovered the predicted 2-dimensional structure. However, the angle of rotation of the group configuration space was such that the dimensions were not clearly defined in the CONFIG weights. That is, the group configuration space was rotated about 45 degrees from Dimension 1 being parallel to the x-axis. My interest was examining the subject weights in this space in relation to several external measures. Since Dimension 1 and 2 were not in line with the x- and y-axes, it seems that the Dimension 1 and Dimension 2 weights would be sharing some of the same information. To correct for this, I rotated the group configuration space so that Dimension 1 was parallel to the x-axis and re-fit the INDSCAL model by telling ALSCAL to use the rotated configuration and that this configuration was FIXED. My question is whether doing this rotation/re-fitting is acceptable or whether I have introduced some sort of error or bias Into my solution.

Another question I have is that the data I am modeling are essentially z-scores, although I believe them to be only fairly stable estimates of distances given the data collection method. I am fitting these models setting at both the RATIO and INTERVAL levels of measurement, and I am finding that the solutions differ depending upon the measurement level--especially in the subject weights. My concern is that the RATIO level is more appropriate for the data, but because the ratio fits is more restrictive the difference in the solution/subject weights is reflecting lack of fit to a greater extent that the interval level solutions. Are there any guidelines for deciding which level of measurement Is appropriate?

Thanks again for you help and any feedback would be appreciated.

Sincerely, Mike

----------------------------------------------------------------- Michael R. Healy, M.A., A.B.D Claremont Graduate University/Pitzer College Department of Psychology 170 E. Tenth St. Claremont, CA 91711-6163

Claremont Memory and Aging Project: 909-607-4499 http://home.earthlink.net/~healym/healym.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------ --


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SPSSX-L page