Comparing generalized procrustes analysis and statis

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 11, Issue 1-2, 2000, Pages 77-83

  Meyners, Michael ^a   Kunert, Joachim ^a   Qannari, El Mostafa ^b  

^a TU DORTMUND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b LUNAM UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Consensus; Dimensionality; GPA; Modified GPA; Sensory profiling; STATIS

Indexed keywords

PROCRUSTES;

EID: 0033634602     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s0950-3293(99)00038-5     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Arnold, G. M. & Williams, A. A. (1986). The use of generalised procrustes techniques in sensory analysis. In: J. R. Piggott, Statistical Procedures in Food Research (pp. 233-253).
2. Dijksterhuis, G. B., & Punter, P. H. (1990). Interpreting generalized procrustes analysis "analysis of variance" tables. Food Quality and Preference 2, 255-265.
3. Gower, J. C. (1975). Generalized procrustes analysis. Psychometrika 40(1), 33-51.
4. Lavit, C., Escoufier, Y., Sabatier, R., & Traissac, P. (1994). The ACT (STATIS method). Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 18, 97-119.
5. Qannari, E. M., Courcoux, P., Lejeune, M., & Maystre, O. (1997). Comparaison de trois stratégies de détermination d'un compromis en évaluation sensorielle. Rev. Statistique Appliquée XLV(1), 61-74.
6. Schlich, P. (1996). Defining and validating assessor compromises about product distances and attribute correlations. In T. Næs, & E. Risvik, Multivariate Analysis of Data in Sensory Science (pp. 259-306).
7. Schönemann, P. H. (1966). A generalized solution of the orthogonal procrustes problem. Psychometrika 31(1), 1-10.
8. ten Berge, J. M. F. (1977). Orthogonal procrustes rotation for two or more matrices. Psychometrika 42(2), 267-276.
9. Wakeling, I. N., Raats, M. M., & MacFie, H. J. H. (1992). A new significance test for consensus in generalized procrustes analysis. Journal of Sensory Studies 7, 91-96.