Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T11:48:30.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multiclus: A New Method for Simultaneously Performing Multidimensional Scaling and Cluster Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Wayne S. DeSarbo ,
Daniel J. Howard  and
Kamel Jedidi
Wayne S. DeSarbo*
Affiliation:
Departments of Marketing and Statistics, The University of Michigan
Daniel J. Howard
Affiliation:
Marketing Department, E. L. Cox School of Business, Southern Methodist University
Kamel Jedidi
Affiliation:
Marketing Department, Graduate School of Business, Columbia University
*
Reprint requests should be sent to Wayne S. DeSarbo, Marketing and Statistics Depts., School of Business, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper develops a maximum likelihood based method for simultaneously performing multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis on two-way dominance or profile data. This MULTICLUS procedure utilizes mixtures of multivariate conditional normal distributions to estimate a joint space of stimulus coordinates and K vectors, one for each cluster or group, in a T-dimensional space. The conditional mixture, maximum likelihood method is introduced together with an E-M algorithm for parameter estimation. A Monte Carlo analysis is presented to investigate the performance of the algorithm as a number of data, parameter, and error factors are experimentally manipulated. Finally, a consumer psychology application is discussed involving consumer expertise/experience with microcomputers.

Keywords

multidimensional scalingcluster analysismaximum likelihood estimationconsumer psychology

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 121 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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

We wish to thank the editor, associate editor, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

References

Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 6, 716–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alba, J. W. (1983). The effects of product knowledge on the comprehension, retention and evaluation of product information. In Bagozzi, R. P., Tybout, A. M. (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (pp. 577–580). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 411–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alba, J. W., & Marmorstein, H. (1987). The effects of frequency knowledge on consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettman, J. R., & Park, C. W. (1980). Effects of prior knowledge and experience and phase of the choice process on consumer decision processes: A protocol analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 7, 234–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettman, J. R., & Sujan, M. (1987). Effects of framing on evaluation of comparable and noncomparable alternatives by expert and novice consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 141–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozdogan, H. (1983). Determining the number of component clusters in standard multivariate normal mixture models using model-selection criterion, Washington, DC: Army Research Office.Google Scholar
Bozdogan, H. (1987). Model selection and Akaike's information criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika, 52, 345–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozdogan, H., & Sclove, S. L. (1984). Multi-sample cluster analysis using Akaike's information criterion. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 36, 163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brucks, M. (1985). The effects of product class knowledge on information search behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data via the E-M algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society-B, 39, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dynkin, E. B. (1961). Necessary and sufficient statistics for a family of probability distributions. Selected translations in mathematical statistics and probability (pp. 17–40). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
Goodman, L. A. (1974). Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models. Biometrika, 61, 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, J., & Brady, F. (1982). Dimensional validity, consistency of preference and product familiarity: An exploratory investigation of wine testing. In Mitchell, A. A. (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (pp. 398–401). St. Louis, MO: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R., & Fisher, W. (1978). A behavioral approach to information acquisition in nondurable purchasing. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 532–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLachlan, G. J. (1987). On bootstrapping the likelihood ratio test statistic for the number of components in a normal mixture. Applied Statistics, 36, 318–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLachlan, G. J., & Basford, K. E. (1988). Mixture models: Inference and applications to clustering, New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Newman, J. W., & Staelin, R. (1972). Prepurchase information seeking for new cars and major household appliances. Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 249–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, C. W., & Lessig, V. P. (1981). Familiarity and its impact on consumer decision biases and heuristics. Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 223–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sclove, S. C. (1977). Population mixture models and clustering algorithms. Communication in Statistics, 6, 417–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sclove, S. L. (1983). Application of the conditional population-mixture model to image segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI-5, 428–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sclove, S. L. (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52, 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sujan, M. (1985). Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takane, Y. (1976). A statistical procedure for the latent profile model. Japanese Psychological Research, 18, 82–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teicher, H. (1961). Identifiability of mixtures. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 32, 244–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teicher, H. (1963). Identifiability of finite mixtures. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34, 1265–1269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titterington, D. M., Smith, A. F. M., & Makov, V. E. (1985). Statistical analysis of finite mixture distributions, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Yakowitz, S. J. (1970). Unsupervised learning and the identification of finite mixtures. IEEE Transactions Information Theory and Control, IT-16, 330–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yakowitz, S. J., & Spragins, J. D. (1968). On the identifiability of finite mixtures. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 39, 209–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar