IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v53y2009i4p1086-1098.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simultaneous analysis of coupled data blocks differing in size: A comparison of two weighting schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Wilderjans, Tom
  • Ceulemans, Eva
  • Van Mechelen, Iven

Abstract

Research questions in several research domains imply the simultaneous analysis of different blocks of information that pertain to the same research objects. In personality psychology, for example, to study the relation between individual differences in behavior and cognitive-affective units that can account for these differences, two types of information pertaining to the same set of persons need to be analyzed simultaneously: (1) information about the situation-specific behavior profile of these persons, and (2) information about the cognitive-affective units these persons exhibit. When dealing with such coupled data blocks (i.e., different N-way N-mode data blocks that have one or more modes in common) it often happens that one data block is much larger in size than the other(s). In this case, the question arises whether the data entries or the data blocks should be considered as the units of information, in order to disclose the true structure underlying the coupled data blocks. To answer this question, two weighting schemes are compared that are obtained by applying weights in the overall objective function that is to be optimized in the data analysis, with each weight indicating the extent to which the corresponding data block influences the integrated analysis. In a simulation study it is showed that weighting the different data blocks such that each data entry influences the analysis to the same extent (i.e., data entries as units of information) outperforms a weighting scheme in which each data block has an equal influence on the analysis (i.e., data blocks as units of information). This superior performance is demonstrated for two global models for coupled data consisting of a three-way three-mode data block and a two-way two-mode data block that have one mode in common: (1) a multiway multiblock component model for coupled real-valued data, and (2) a simultaneous clustering model for coupled binary data.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilderjans, Tom & Ceulemans, Eva & Van Mechelen, Iven, 2009. "Simultaneous analysis of coupled data blocks differing in size: A comparison of two weighting schemes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 1086-1098, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2009:i:4:p:1086-1098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(08)00464-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Iwin Leenen & Iven Mechelen & Andrew Gelman & Stijn Knop, 2008. "Bayesian Hierarchical Classes Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 39-64, March.
    2. Van Mechelen, Iven & Schepers, Jan, 2007. "A unifying model involving a categorical and/or dimensional reduction for multimode data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 537-549, September.
    3. Iwin Leenen & Iven Mechelen & Paul Boeck & Seymour Rosenberg, 1999. "Indclas: A three-way hierarchical classes model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 64(1), pages 9-24, March.
    4. Pieter Kroonenberg & Jan Leeuw, 1980. "Principal component analysis of three-mode data by means of alternating least squares algorithms," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 45(1), pages 69-97, March.
    5. J. Carroll & Jih-Jie Chang, 1970. "Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of “Eckart-Young” decomposition," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(3), pages 283-319, September.
    6. Ledyard Tucker, 1966. "Some mathematical notes on three-mode factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 31(3), pages 279-311, September.
    7. Paul Boeck & Seymour Rosenberg, 1988. "Hierarchical classes: Model and data analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 53(3), pages 361-381, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tom Frans Wilderjans & Eva Gaer & Henk A. L. Kiers & Iven Mechelen & Eva Ceulemans, 2017. "Principal Covariates Clusterwise Regression (PCCR): Accounting for Multicollinearity and Population Heterogeneity in Hierarchically Organized Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 86-111, March.
    2. Tom Wilderjans & Dirk Depril & Iven Mechelen, 2012. "Block-Relaxation Approaches for Fitting the INDCLUS Model," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 29(3), pages 277-296, October.
    3. Simon Lineu Umbach, 2020. "Forecasting with supervised factor models," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 169-190, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mariela González-Narváez & María José Fernández-Gómez & Susana Mendes & José-Luis Molina & Omar Ruiz-Barzola & Purificación Galindo-Villardón, 2021. "Study of Temporal Variations in Species–Environment Association through an Innovative Multivariate Method: MixSTATICO," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, May.
    2. Henk Kiers, 1991. "Hierarchical relations among three-way methods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 449-470, September.
    3. Willem Kloot & Pieter Kroonenberg, 1985. "External analysis with three-mode principal component models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 479-494, December.
    4. Elisa Frutos-Bernal & Ángel Martín del Rey & Irene Mariñas-Collado & María Teresa Santos-Martín, 2022. "An Analysis of Travel Patterns in Barcelona Metro Using Tucker3 Decomposition," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Giuseppe Brandi & Ruggero Gramatica & Tiziana Di Matteo, 2019. "Unveil stock correlation via a new tensor-based decomposition method," Papers 1911.06126, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2020.
    6. Michel Velden & Tammo Bijmolt, 2006. "Generalized canonical correlation analysis of matrices with missing rows: a simulation study," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 323-331, June.
    7. Paolo Giordani & Roberto Rocci & Giuseppe Bove, 2020. "Factor Uniqueness of the Structural Parafac Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 85(3), pages 555-574, September.
    8. Alwin Stegeman & Tam Lam, 2014. "Three-Mode Factor Analysis by Means of Candecomp/Parafac," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 426-443, July.
    9. Tom Wilderjans & E. Ceulemans & I. Mechelen, 2012. "The SIMCLAS Model: Simultaneous Analysis of Coupled Binary Data Matrices with Noise Heterogeneity Between and Within Data Blocks," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 77(4), pages 724-740, October.
    10. Roberto Rocci & Jos Berge, 2002. "Transforming three-way arrays to maximal simplicity," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 351-365, September.
    11. Bilian Chen & Zhening Li & Shuzhong Zhang, 2015. "On optimal low rank Tucker approximation for tensors: the case for an adjustable core size," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 62(4), pages 811-832, August.
    12. Timmerman, Marieke E. & Kiers, Henk A. L., 2002. "Three-way component analysis with smoothness constraints," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 447-470, September.
    13. Richard Harshman & Margaret Lundy, 1996. "Uniqueness proof for a family of models sharing features of Tucker's three-mode factor analysis and PARAFAC/candecomp," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 133-154, March.
    14. Rubinstein, Alexander & Slutskin, Lev, 2018. "«Multiway data analysis» and the general problem of journals’ ranking," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 50, pages 90-113.
    15. Eva Ceulemans & Iven Mechelen & Iwin Leenen, 2003. "Tucker3 hierarchical classes analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 413-433, September.
    16. Carlos Martin-Barreiro & John A. Ramirez-Figueroa & Ana B. Nieto-Librero & Víctor Leiva & Ana Martin-Casado & M. Purificación Galindo-Villardón, 2021. "A New Algorithm for Computing Disjoint Orthogonal Components in the Three-Way Tucker Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-22, January.
    17. Eva Ceulemans & Iven Mechelen, 2004. "Tucker2 hierarchical classes analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 375-399, September.
    18. Stegeman, Alwin, 2014. "Finding the limit of diverging components in three-way Candecomp/Parafac—A demonstration of its practical merits," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 203-216.
    19. Dawn Iacobucci & Doug Grisaffe & Wayne DeSarbo, 2017. "Statistical perceptual maps: using confidence region ellipses to enhance the interpretations of brand positions in multidimensional scaling," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(3), pages 81-98, December.
    20. Ji Yeh Choi & Heungsun Hwang & Marieke E. Timmerman, 2018. "Functional Parallel Factor Analysis for Functions of One- and Two-dimensional Arguments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 83(1), pages 1-20, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2009:i:4:p:1086-1098. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.