27.10.2014 Views

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

Russel-Research-Method-in-Anthropology

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Multivariate Analysis 683<br />

<strong>in</strong>stead of <strong>in</strong> only two. The extra dimension would give us plenty of room to<br />

move around and we could better adjust the proportionality of the distances<br />

between the various pairs of variables.<br />

In pr<strong>in</strong>ciple, you can perfectly represent the relations among n variables <strong>in</strong><br />

n 1 dimensions, so that any graph of six variables can be perfectly represented<br />

<strong>in</strong> five dimensions. But even a three-dimensional graph is hard to read.<br />

What would you do with a five-dimensional graph?<br />

Most researchers specify a two-dimensional solution when they run an<br />

MDS computer analysis. MDS programs produce a statistic that measures the<br />

‘‘stress’’ <strong>in</strong> the graph produced by the program. This is a measure of how far<br />

off the graph is from one that would be perfectly proportional. The lower the<br />

stress, the better the solution. This means that a cluster of variables <strong>in</strong> an MDS<br />

graph with low stress is likely to reflect some reality about the cognitive world<br />

of the people be<strong>in</strong>g studied.<br />

A Physical World Example: Mak<strong>in</strong>g Maps with MDS<br />

A physical example, based on metric data, will make this clearer. Afterward,<br />

we’ll move on to a cognitive example, one based on nonmetric data.<br />

Table 21.26 shows the road distance <strong>in</strong> miles between all pairs of n<strong>in</strong>e cities<br />

<strong>in</strong> the United States.<br />

TABLE 21.26<br />

Distances between N<strong>in</strong>e U.S. Cities (<strong>in</strong> Miles)<br />

BOS NY DC MIA CHI SEA SF LA DEN<br />

Boston 0<br />

NY 206 0<br />

DC 429 233 0<br />

Miami 1504 1308 1075 0<br />

Chicago 963 802 671 1329 0<br />

Seattle 2976 2815 2684 3273 2013 0<br />

SF 3095 2934 2799 3053 2142 808 0<br />

LA 2979 2786 2631 2687 2054 1131 379 0<br />

Denver 1949 1771 1616 2037 996 1037 1235 1059 0<br />

SOURCE: Anthropac 4.0 and Anthropac 4.0 <strong>Method</strong>s Guide, by S. P. Borgatti, 1992a, 1992b. Repr<strong>in</strong>ted with<br />

permission of the author.<br />

Note two th<strong>in</strong>gs about the numbers <strong>in</strong> this table. First, the numbers are dissimilarities,<br />

not similarities, because bigger numbers mean that th<strong>in</strong>gs are farther<br />

apart—less like each other. Smaller numbers mean that th<strong>in</strong>gs are close<br />

together—more similar. Similarity and dissimilarity matrices are known col-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!