Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T16:19:19.534Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hierarchical Classes: Model and Data Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Paul De Boeck  and
Seymour Rosenberg
Paul De Boeck*
Affiliation:
University of Leuven, Belgium
Seymour Rosenberg*
Affiliation:
Rutgers University
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Paul De Boeck, Department of Psychology, University of Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, 3000 Leuven, BELGIUM; or to Seymour Rosenberg, Department of Psychology, Kilmer Campus—Tillett Hall, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.
Requests for reprints should be sent to Paul De Boeck, Department of Psychology, University of Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, 3000 Leuven, BELGIUM; or to Seymour Rosenberg, Department of Psychology, Kilmer Campus—Tillett Hall, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A discrete, categorical model and a corresponding data-analysis method are presented for two-way two-mode (objects × attributes) data arrays with 0, 1 entries. The model contains the following two basic components: a set-theoretical formulation of the relations among objects and attributes; a Boolean decomposition of the matrix. The set-theoretical formulation defines a subset of the possible decompositions as consistent with it. A general method for graphically representing the set-theoretical decomposition is described. The data-analysis algorithm, dubbed HICLAS, aims at recovering the underlying structure in a data matrix by minimizing the discrepancies between the data and the recovered structure. HICLAS is evaluated with a simulation study and two empirical applications.

Keywords

binary dataBoolean algebrahierarchical classesset-theoretical modeltwo-way two-mode matrices

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , September 1988 , pp. 361 - 381
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

This research was supported in part by a grant from the Belgian NSF (NFWO) to Paul De Boeck and in part by NSF Grant BNS-83-01027 to Seymour Rosenberg. We thank Iven Van Mechelen for clarifying several aspects of the Boolean algebraic formulation of the model and Phipps Arabie for his comments on an earlier draft.

References

Arabie, P., Boorman, S. A., & Levitt, P. R. (1978). Constructing blockmodels: How and why. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 17, 21–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arabie, P., & Carroll, J. D. (1980). MAPCLUS: A mathematical programming approach to fitting the ADCLUS model. Psychometrika, 45, 211–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arabie, P., & Carroll, J. D. (1980b). Conceptions of overlap in social structure. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Breiger, R. L., Boorman, S. A., & Arabie, P. (1975). An algorithm for clustering data, with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 12, 328–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrington, P. J., & Heil, G. H. (1981). COBLOC: A hierarchical method for blocking network data. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 12, 328–383.Google Scholar
D'Andrade, R. G. (1976). A propositional analysis of the U.S. American beliefs about illness. In Basso, K. H. & Selby, H. A. (Eds.), Meaning in anthropology (pp. 155–180). Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
De Boeck, P. (1983, July). Prototype analysis. Paper presented at the European Meeting of Classification Societies, Jouy-en-Josas, France.Google Scholar
De Boeck, P. (1986). HICLAS Fortran program documentation, Belgium: University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Desarbo, W. S. (1982). Gennclus: New models for general nonhierarchical clustering analysis. Psychometrika, 47, 449–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, S. (1973). The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory. American Psychologist, 28, 404–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gara, M. (1985). Personal prototypes: A new look at person perception. Unpublished manuscript, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Gara, M. A., & Rosenberg, S. (1979). The identification of persons as supersets and subsets in free-response personality descriptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2161–2170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartigan, J. A. (1975). Clustering algorithms, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Homans, G. C. (1950). The human group, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology, New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. C. (1967). Hierarchical clustering schemes. Psychometrika, 32, 241–254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs, New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Kihlstrom, J. F., & Cantor, N. (1984). Mental representations of the self. In Berkowitz, L. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1–47). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kim, K. H. (1982). Boolean matrix theory, New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Kim, M. P., & Rosenberg, S. (1980). Comparisons of two structural models of implicit personality theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 375–389.Google Scholar
Lambert, J. M., & Williams, W. T. (1962). Multivariate methods in plant ecology. IV. Nodal analysis. Journal of Ecology, 50, 775–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1966). Identities and interactions, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Mickey, M. R., Mundle, P., & Engelman, L. (1983). Boolean factor analysis. In Dixon, W. J. (Eds.), BMDP statistical software (pp. 538–545). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, S. (1977). New approaches to the analysis of personal constructs in person perception. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 174–242). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, S., & Olshan, K. (1970). Evaluative and descriptive aspects in personality perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 619–626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shepard, R. N., & Arabie, P. (1979). Additive clustering: Representation of similarities of discrete overlapping properties. Psychological Review, 80, 87–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneath, P. H. A., & Sokal, R. R. (1973). Numerical taxonomy, San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1982). Commitment, identity salience, and role behavior. Theory and research example. In Ickes, W. & Knowles, E. (Eds.), Personality, roles and social behavior (pp. 199–218). New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, H. C., Boorman, S. A., & Breiger, R. L. (1976). Social structure from multiple networks, I: Blockmodels of roles and positions. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 730–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar