IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0020693.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simplification and Shift in Cognition of Political Difference: Applying the Geometric Modeling to the Analysis of Semantic Similarity Judgment

Author

Listed:
  • Junko Kato
  • Kensuke Okada

Abstract

Perceiving differences by means of spatial analogies is intrinsic to human cognition. Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) analysis based on Minkowski geometry has been used primarily on data on sensory similarity judgments, leaving judgments on abstractive differences unanalyzed. Indeed, analysts have failed to find appropriate experimental or real-life data in this regard. Our MDS analysis used survey data on political scientists' judgments of the similarities and differences between political positions expressed in terms of distance. Both distance smoothing and majorization techniques were applied to a three-way dataset of similarity judgments provided by at least seven experts on at least five parties' positions on at least seven policies (i.e., originally yielding 245 dimensions) to substantially reduce the risk of local minima. The analysis found two dimensions, which were sufficient for mapping differences, and fit the city-block dimensions better than the Euclidean metric in all datasets obtained from 13 countries. Most city-block dimensions were highly correlated with the simplified criterion (i.e., the left–right ideology) for differences that are actually used in real politics. The isometry of the city-block and dominance metrics in two-dimensional space carries further implications. More specifically, individuals may pay attention to two dimensions (if represented in the city-block metric) or focus on a single dimension (if represented in the dominance metric) when judging differences between the same objects. Switching between metrics may be expected to occur during cognitive processing as frequently as the apparent discontinuities and shifts in human attention that may underlie changing judgments in real situations occur. Consequently, the result has extended strong support for the validity of the geometric models to represent an important social cognition, i.e., the one of political differences, which is deeply rooted in human nature.

Suggested Citation

  • Junko Kato & Kensuke Okada, 2011. "Simplification and Shift in Cognition of Political Difference: Applying the Geometric Modeling to the Analysis of Semantic Similarity Judgment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-9, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0020693
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020693
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020693
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020693&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0020693?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger Shepard, 1962. "The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function. II," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 27(3), pages 219-246, September.
    2. Warren Torgerson, 1965. "Multidimensional scaling of similarity," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 30(4), pages 379-393, December.
    3. Roger Shepard, 1962. "The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function. I," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 27(2), pages 125-140, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Roger Shepard, 1974. "Representation of structure in similarity data: Problems and prospects," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 39(4), pages 373-421, December.
    2. Bert Green, 1966. "The computer revolution in psychometrics," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 31(4), pages 437-445, December.
    3. J. Sutcliffe, 1986. "Differential ordering of objects and attributes," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 51(2), pages 209-240, June.
    4. la Grange, Anthony & le Roux, Niël & Gardner-Lubbe, Sugnet, 2009. "BiplotGUI: Interactive Biplots in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 30(i12).
    5. Venera Tomaselli, 1996. "Multivariate statistical techniques and sociological research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 253-276, August.
    6. Bijmolt, T.H.A. & Wedel, M., 1996. "A Monte Carlo Evaluation of Maximum Likelihood Multidimensional Scaling Methods," Other publications TiSEM f72cc9d8-f370-43aa-a224-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Phipps Arabie & J. Carroll, 1980. "Mapclus: A mathematical programming approach to fitting the adclus model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 45(2), pages 211-235, June.
    8. Yoshio Takane & Forrest Young & Jan Leeuw, 1977. "Nonmetric individual differences multidimensional scaling: An alternating least squares method with optimal scaling features," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 42(1), pages 7-67, March.
    9. Karim Abou-Moustafa & Frank P. Ferrie, 2018. "Local generalized quadratic distance metrics: application to the k-nearest neighbors classifier," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 12(2), pages 341-363, June.
    10. M. Keshavarzi & M. A. Dehghan & M. Mashinchi, 2012. "Applications of classification based on similarities and dissimilarities," Fuzzy Information and Engineering, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 75-91, March.
    11. Dionisios Koutsantonis & Konstantinos Koutsantonis & Nikolaos P. Bakas & Vagelis Plevris & Andreas Langousis & Savvas A. Chatzichristofis, 2022. "Bibliometric Literature Review of Adaptive Learning Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, October.
    12. Henry Brady, 1989. "Factor and ideal point analysis for interpersonally incomparable data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 54(2), pages 181-202, June.
    13. Stephen Johnson, 1967. "Hierarchical clustering schemes," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 32(3), pages 241-254, September.
    14. Maital, Shlomo, 1976. "Multidimensional Scaling: Some Economic Applications," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275316, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    15. Fernández, Xosé Luis & Coto-Millán, Pablo & Díaz-Medina, Benito, 2018. "The impact of tourism on airport efficiency: The Spanish case," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 52-58.
    16. Morales José F. & Song Tingting & Auerbach Arleen D. & Wittkowski Knut M., 2008. "Phenotyping Genetic Diseases Using an Extension of µ-Scores for Multivariate Data," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20, June.
    17. J. Kruskal, 1964. "Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 29(2), pages 115-129, June.
    18. Roger Girard & Norman Cliff, 1976. "A monte carlo evaluation of interactive multidimensional scaling," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 41(1), pages 43-64, March.
    19. Lyle Jones, 1963. "Beyond Babbage," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 28(4), pages 315-331, December.
    20. Karen E. Kirkhart & Robert O. Morgan, 1986. "Evaluation in Mental Health Centers," Evaluation Review, , vol. 10(1), pages 127-141, February.

    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:plo:pone00:0020693. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.