Each of the above measurements was obtained independently (e.g., volume was measured in terms of cubic feet of
water displaced when the object was immersed in a tub.)2
Being assured that the measurements were accurate.3
Tom then proceeded to analyze the data in order to
determine the basic underlying dimensions. He reasoned that factor analysis was the proper way to approach the
1
The idea of using data from physical objects is not new. Demonstration analyses have been performed on boxes,
bottles, geometric figures, cup; of coffee and balls. Overall (1964) provides a bibliography on this literature. The
primary concern in these papers has been to determine which measurement models provide the most adequate
description. 2
Actually, the data for length. width and thickness were determined from the following arbitrary rules:
(a) Random integers from 1 to 4 were selected to represent width and thickness with the additional provision
that the width ≥ thickness.
(b) A random integer from 1 to 6 was selected to represent length with the provision that length ≥width.
(c) A number of the additional variables are merely obvious combinations of length, width, and thickness.
The physical characteristics of the metals were derived from the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Nine different
metals were used (aluminum, steel, lead, magnesium, gold. copper, silver, tin, and zinc.) Seven parallellepipeds of
each type of metal were created. 3
problem since he was interested in reducing the number of descriptive measures from his original set of 11 and he
also suspected that there was a great deal of multicollinearity in the original data. The California Biomedical 03M
program was used to obtain a principal components solution. The procedure conformed with the following
conventions:
(a) Only factors having eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were used. (This yielded three factors which
summarized 90% of the information contained in the original 11 variables.)
(b) An orthogonal rotation was performed. This was done since Swift believed that basic underlying
factors are statistically independent of one another.
(c) The factors were interpreted by trying to minimize the overlap of variable loadings on each factor.
(The decision rule to use only those variables with a loading greater than 0.70 utilized all 11
variable. with no overlap in the 3 factor rotation.)
Principal components was used since this is the recommended factor analytic method when one is interested in
generating hypotheses from a set of data
Each of the above measurements was obtained independently (e.g., volume was measured in terms of cubic feet of
water displaced when the object was immersed in a tub.)2
Being assured that the measurements were accurate.3
Tom then proceeded to analyze the data in order to
determine the basic underlying dimensions. He reasoned that factor analysis was the proper way to approach the
1
The idea of using data from physical objects is not new. Demonstration analyses have been performed on boxes,
bottles, geometric figures, cup; of coffee and balls. Overall (1964) provides a bibliography on this literature. The
primary concern in these papers has been to determine which measurement models provide the most adequate
description. 2
Actually, the data for length. width and thickness were determined from the following arbitrary rules:
(a) Random integers from 1 to 4 were selected to represent width and thickness with the additional provision
that the width ≥ thickness.
(b) A random integer from 1 to 6 was selected to represent length with the provision that length ≥width.
(c) A number of the additional variables are merely obvious combinations of length, width, and thickness.
The physical characteristics of the metals were derived from the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Nine different
metals were used (aluminum, steel, lead, magnesium, gold. copper, silver, tin, and zinc.) Seven parallellepipeds of
each type of metal were created. 3
problem since he was interested in reducing the number of descriptive measures from his original set of 11 and he
also suspected that there was a great deal of multicollinearity in the original data. The California Biomedical 03M
program was used to obtain a principal components solution. The procedure conformed with the following
conventions:
(a) Only factors having eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were used. (This yielded three factors which
summarized 90% of the information contained in the original 11 variables.)
(b) An orthogonal rotation was performed. This was done since Swift believed that basic underlying
factors are statistically independent of one another.
(c) The factors were interpreted by trying to minimize the overlap of variable loadings on each factor.
(The decision rule to use only those variables with a loading greater than 0.70 utilized all 11
variable. with no overlap in the 3 factor rotation.)
Principal components was used since this is the recommended factor analytic method when one is interested in
generating hypotheses from a set of data
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..