Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T07:38:11.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Generalized Approaches to the Maxbet Problem and the Maxdiff Problem, with Applications to Canonical Correlations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Jos M. F. ten Berge
Jos M. F. ten Berge*
Affiliation:
University of Groningen
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Jos M.F. ten Berge, Vakgroep Psychologic, RU Groningen, Grote Markt 32, 9712 HV Groningen, THE NETHERLANDS.
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Van de Geer has reviewed various criteria for transforming two or more matrices to maximal agreement, subject to orthogonality constraints. The criteria have applications in the context of matching factor or configuration matrices and in the context of canonical correlation analysis for two or more matrices. The present paper summarizes and gives a unified treatment of fully general computational solutions for two of these criteria, Maxbet and Maxdiff. These solutions will be shown to encompass various well-known methods as special cases. It will be argued that the Maxdiff solution should be preferred to the Maxbet solution whenever the two criteria coincide. Horst's Maxcor method will be shown to lack the property of monotone convergence. Finally, simultaneous and successive versions of the Maxbet and Maxdiff solutions will be treated as special cases of a fully flexible approach where the columns of the rotation matrices are obtained in successive blocks.

Keywords

matching configurationsProcrustes rotationSUMCORMAXCORsuccessiveblocks

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , December 1988, pp. 487 - 494
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

The author is obliged to Henk Kiers for computational assistance and helpful comments.

References

Burt, C. (1948). The factorial study of temperamental traits. British Journal of Psychology, Statistical Section, 1, 178–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cliff, N., & Krus, D. J. (1976). Interpretation of canonical analysis: Rotated vs. unrotated solutions. Psychometrika, 41, 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, P. (1961). Relations amongm sets of measures. Psychometrika, 26, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, P. (1965). Factor analysis of data matrices, New-York: Holt.Google Scholar
Hotelling, H. (1933). Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. Journal of Educational Psychology, 24, 417–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettenring, J. R. (1971). Canonical analysis of several sets of variables. Biometrika, 58, 433–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristof, W., & Wingersky, B. (1971). Generalization of the orthogonal Procrustes rotation procedure for more than two matrices. Proceedings of the 79th Annual convention of the American Psychological Association, 6, 89–90.Google Scholar
Lingoes, J. C., & Borg, I. (1978). A direct approach to individual differences scaling using increasingly complex transformations. Psychometrika, 43, 491–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, T. J., & Jackosfsky, E. F. (1981). Interpreting canonical analysis: The use of orthogonal transformations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 661–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutishauser, H. (1969). Computational aspects of F. L. Bauer's simultaneous iteration method. Numerische Mathematik, 13, 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ten Berge, J. M. F. (1977). Orthogonal Procrustes rotation for two or more matrices. Psychometrika, 42, 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ten Berge, J. M. F. (1986). A general solution for the Maxbet problem. In de Leeuw, J., Heiser, W. J. & Meulman, J., Critchley, F. (Eds.), Multidimensional data analysis (pp. 81–87). Leiden: DSWO-press.Google Scholar
ten Berge, J. M. F. & Knol, D. L. (1984). Orthogonal rotations to maximal agreement for two or more matrices of different column orders. Psychometrika, 49, 49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, L. R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies, Washington, D.C.: Department of the Army.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Geer, J. P. (1984). Linear relations amongk sets of variables. Psychometrika, 49, 70–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar