Skip to main content
Log in

Exploratory analysis of contingency tables by loglinear formulation and generalizations of correspondence analysis

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Goodman's (1979, 1981, 1985) loglinear formulation for bi-way contingency tables is extended to tables with or without missing cells and is used for exploratory purposes. A similar formulation is done for three-way tables and generalizations of correspondence analysis are deduced. A generalized version of Goodman's algorithm, based on Newton's elementary unidimensional method is used to estimate the scores in all cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bartlett, M. S. (1935). Contingency table interactions.Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Supplement 2, 248–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahadur, R. R. (1961). A representation of the joint distribution of responses ton dichotomous items. In H. Solomon (Ed.), Studies in item analysis and prediction (pp. 158–168). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bener, A. (1982). Decomposition des interactions dans dans une correspondance multiple [Decomposition of interactions in a multi-way table].Les Cahiers de l'Analyse des Données, 7, 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benzécri, J. P. (1973). L'Analyse des Données: Tome 2, L'Analyse des Correspondances [Data Analysis: Vol. II, Correspondence analysis], Paris: Dunod.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, Y. M. M., Fienberg, S. E., & Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete Multivariate Analysis, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. D., & Chang, J. J. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via anN-way generalization of “Eckart-Young” decomposition.Psychometrika, 35, 283–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caussinus, H. (1965). Contribution à l'analyse de la corrélation de deux caractères qualitatifs [Contribution to the correlation analysis of two qualitative variables].Annales de la Faculté des sciences de Toulouse, 29, 77–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ĉencov, N. N. (1982).Statistical decision rules and optimal inference, Vol. 53. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choulakian, V. (1986)Analysis of multiway categorical tables by simple correspondence analysis. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Csiszar, I. (1975).I-Divergence geometry of probability distributions and minimization problems.The Annals of Probability, 3(1), 146–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darroch, J. N. (1974). Multiplicative and additive interaction in contingency tables.Biometrika, 61, 207–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daudin, J. J., & Trécourt, P. (1980). Analyse Factorielle de correspondance et modèle log-linéaire: comparaison de deux méthodes sur exemple [Correspondence analysis and loglinear model: Comparison of both methods on an example].Revue de Statistique Appliquée, 28, 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Leeuw, J. (1983). Models and methods for the analysis of correlation coefficients.Journal of Econometrics, 22, 113–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucart, T. (1984). Analyse Factorielle de tableaux multiples [Factorial analysis of multiway tables]. Paris: Masson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. (1968). The analysis of cross-classified data: Independence, quasi-independence, and interactions in contingency tables with or without missing entries.Journal of American Statistical Association, 63, 1091–1131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. A. (1979). Simple models for the analysis of association in cross-classifications having ordered categories.Journal of American Statistical Association, 74, 537–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. A. (1981). Association models and canonical correlation in the analysis of cross-classifications having ordered categories.Journal of American Statistical Association, 76, 320–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. A. (1985). The analysis of cross-classified data having ordered and/or unordered categories: Association models, correlation models, and asymmetry models for contingency tables with or without missing entries.Annals of Statistics, 13(1), 10–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenacre, M. J. (1984). Theory and applications of correspondence analysis, London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harshman, R. A., Ladefoged, P., & Goldstein, L. (1977). Factor analysis of tongue shapes,Journal of Acoustical Society of America, 62, 693–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1983).Using modern statistical methods to improve the presentation of the annual summaries of GRE candidate background data (ETS Research Report 83-8). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruskal, J. B. (1983). Multilinear methods.Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, 28, 75–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ku, H. H., & Kullback, S. (1968). Interaction in multidimensional contingency tables: An information theoretic approach.Journal Research National Bureau of Standards, 728, 159–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, H. O. (1951). Complex contingency tables treated by the partition ofx 2.Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 13, 242–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, H. O. (1969).The chi-squared distribution. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, H. O. (1975). The multiplicative definition of interaction.Australian Journal of Statistics, 13, 36–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, H. O. (1975). Joint probability distributions in the Meixner classes.Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 37, 434–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauro, N. C., & Decarli, A. (1982). Correspondence analysis and log-linear models in multi-way contingency tables study: Some remarks on experimental data.Metron, 40, 21–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebart, L., Morineau, A., & Warwick, K. M. (1984). Multivariate descriptive analysis: Correspondence analysis and related techniques for large matrices, New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leclerc, A., Chevalier, A., Luce, D., & Blanc, M. (1985). Analyses des correspondances et modèle logistique: Possibilités et intérêts d'approches complémentaires [Correspondence analysis and logistic model: Possibilities for complementary approaches].Revue de Statistique Appliquée, 33(1), 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishisato, S. (1980). Analysis of categorical data: Dual scaling and its applications. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, S. N., & Kastenbaum, M. A. (1956). On the hypothesis of “no interaction” in a multi-way contingency table.Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 27, 749–757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spring, D. (1985). On the second derivative test for constrained local maxima.The American Mathematical Monthly, 92, 631–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tenenhaus, M., & Young, F. (1985). An analysis and synthesis of multiple correspondence analysis, optimal scaling, dual scaling, homogeneity analysis and other methods for quantifying categorical multivariate data.Psychometrika, 50, 91–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Heijden, P. G. M., & de Leeuw, J. (1985). Correspondence analysis used complementary to loglinear analysis.Psychometrika, 50, 429–447.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This research was partially supported by National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Grant No. A8724. The author is grateful to the reviewers and the editor for helpful comments.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Choulakian, V. Exploratory analysis of contingency tables by loglinear formulation and generalizations of correspondence analysis. Psychometrika 53, 235–250 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294135

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294135

Key words

Navigation