Analysing partial ranks by using smoothed paired comparison methods: An investigation of value orientation in Europe

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C: Applied Statistics

Volumn 51, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 319-336

  Francis, Brian ^a,c   Dittrich, Regina ^b   Hatzinger, Reinhold ^b   Penn, Roger ^a  

^a LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Austria)

^c LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bradley Terry model; Generalized additive model; GLIM; Inglehart index; International Social Science Programme; Materialism; Ranked survey data

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036426785     PISSN: 00359254     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9876.00271     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Agresti, A. (1992) Analysis of ordinal paired comparison data. Appl. Statist., 41, 287-297.
2. Akaike, H. (1973) Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. Information Theory (eds B.N. Petrov and F. Csáki), pp. 267-281. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
3. Bean, C. and Papadakis, E. (1994) Polarized priorities or flexible alternatives?: dimensionality in Inglehart's materialism-postmaterialism scale. Int. J. Publ. Opin. Res., 6, 254-288.
4. Böckenholt, U. and Dillon, W. (1997) Some new methods for an old problem: modeling preference changes and competitive market structures in pretest market data. Marktng Res., 34, 130-142.
5. Bowman, A. and Azzalini, A. (1997) Applied Smoothing Techniques for Data Analysis. Oxford: Clarendon.
6. Bradley, R. and Terry, M. (1952) Rank analysis of incomplete block designs: I, The method of paired comparisons. Biometrika, 39, 324-345.
7. Bürklin, W., Klein, M. and Ruß, A. (1994) Dimensionen des Wertewandels: eine empirische Längsschnittanalyse zur Dimensionalität und der Wandlungsdynamik gesellschaftlicher Wertorientierungen. Polit. Vierteljahr., 35, 579-606.
8. Chapman, R. and Staelin, R. (1982) Exploiting rank ordered choice set data within the stochastic utility model. Marktng Res., 19, 288-301.
9. Critchlow, D. and Fligner, M. (1993) Ranking models with item variables. Lect. Notes Statist., 80, 1-19.
10. Dittrich, R., Hatzinger, R. and Katzenbeisser, W. (1998a) Fitting paired comparison models in GLIM: (II) subject and object specific covariates. GLIM Newslett., 28, 21-28.
11. _ (1998b) Modelling the effect of subject-specific covariates in paired comparison studies with an application to university rankings. Appl. Statist., 47, 511-525; correction, 50 (2001), 247-249.
12. _ (2002) Modelling dependencies in paired comparison experiments. Comput. Statist. Data Anal., to be published.
13. Dittrich, R., Katzenbeisser, W. and Reisinger, H. (2000) The analysis of rank ordered preference data based on Bradley-Terry Type Models. OR Spekt., 22, 117-134.
14. Flanagan, S. (1982) Changing values in advanced industrial societies: Inglehart's silent revolution from the perspective of Japanese findings. Compar. Polit. Stud., 14, 403-444.
15. Francis, B., Green, M. and Payne, C. (1993) The GLIM System, Release 4 Manual. Oxford: Clarendon.
16. Frizell, A. (1996) The ISSP and international research: an introduction. In Social Inequality in Canada (eds A. Frizell and J. Pammett). Ottawa: Carleton University Press.
17. Hastie, T. and Tibshirani, R. (1990) Generalized Additive Models. London: Chapman and Hall.
18. _ (1993) Varying-coefficient models (with discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. B, 55, 757-796.
19. Healy, M. (2000) Matrices for Statistics, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Heath, A. and Park, A. (1997) Thatcher's children. In British Social Attitudes 14th Report: the End of Conservative Values? (eds R. Jowell, J. Curtice, A. Park, L. Brook, K. Thomson and C. Bryson). Aldershot: Ashgate.
21. Herz, T. (1987) Werte, sozio-politische Konflikte und Generationen: eine Überprüfung der Theorie des Postmaterialismus. Z. Soziol., 16, 56-69.
22. Inglehart, R. (1977) The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles among Western Publics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
23. Jowell, R., Brook, L. and Dowds, L. (1993) International Social Attitudes: the 10th BSA Report. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing.
24. Klein, M. (1995) Wieviel Platz bleibt in Prokrustesbett?: Wertewandel in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zwischen 1973 und 1992 gemessen anhand des Inglehart-Index. Köln. Z. Soziol. Sozialpsych., 47, 207-230.
25. Louviere, J.J., Fox, M.F. and Moore, W.L. (1993) Cross-task validity comparisons of stated preference choice models. Marktng Lett., 4, 205-213.
26. Mallows, C. (1957) Non-null ranking models: I. Biometrika, 44, 114-130.
27. Mannheim, K. (1928) Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
28. Marden, J. (1995) Analyzing and Modelling Rank Data. London: Chapman and Hall.
29. Marsh, A. (1996) The silent revolution, value priorities and the quality of life in Britain. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev., 69, 21-30.
30. Matthews, J.N.S. and Morris, K.P. (1995) An application of Bradley-Terry-type models to the measurement of pain. Appl. Statist., 44, 243-255.
31. Reif, K. and Inglehart, R. (1991) Euro-barometer: the Dynamics of European Opinion. London: Macmillan.
32. Simonoff, J. and Tsai, C. (1999) Semiparametric and additive model selection using an improved Akaike information criterion. J. Comput. Graph Statist., 8, 22-40.
33. Sinclair, C. (1982) GLIM for preference. Lect. Notes Statist., 14, 164-178.
34. Wilkinson, G.N. and Rogers, C.E. (1973) Symbolic description of factorial models for analysis of variance. Appl. Statist., 22, 392-399.