Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mixed-effects analyses of rank-ordered data

  • Articles
  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a synthesis of Bock's (1972) nominal categories model and Luce's (1959) choice model for mixed-effects analyses of rank-ordered data. It is shown that the proposed ranking model is both parsimonious and flexible in accounting for preference heterogeneity as well as fixed and random effects of covariates. Relationships to other approaches, including Takane's (1987) ideal point discriminant model and Croon's (1989) latent-class version of Luce's ranking model, are also discussed. The application focuses on a ranking study of behavioral traits that parents find desirable in children.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Allison, P.D., & Christakis, N.A. (1994). Logit models for sets of ranked items. In P. Marsden (Ed.),Sociological Methodology, 1994 (pp. 199–228). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwin, D.F. (1990). Historical changes in parental orientations to children.Sociological Studies of Child Development, 3, 65–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwin, D.F., & Jackson, D.J. (1982). The statistical analysis of Kohn's measures of parental values. In K.G. Jöreskog & H. Wold (Eds.),Systems under indirect observations: Causality, structure, and prediction (pp. 197–223). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beggs, S.S., Cardell, S., & Hausman, J. (1981). Assessing the potential demand for electric cars.Journal of Econometrics, 16, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M., & Lerman, S. (1985).Discrete choice analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M., Morikawa, T., & Shiroishi, F. (1992). Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data.Journal of Business Research, 24, 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock, R.D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories.Psychometrika, 37, 29–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, R.D. & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: An application of the EM algorithm.Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böckenholt, U. (1992). Thurstonian representation for partial ranking data.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 31–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böckenholt, U. (1993). Applications of Thurstonian models to ranking data. In M. Fligner & J. Verducci (Eds.),Probability models and statistical analyses for ranking data (157–172). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, W., & Bentler, P.M. (1998). Covariance structure analysis of ordinal ipsative data.Psychometrika, 63, 369–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, R. & Staelin, R. (1982). Exploiting rank ordered choice set data within the stochastic utility model.Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 288–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Critchlow, D.E. & Fligner, M.A. (1993). Ranking models with item covariates. In M. Fligner & J. Verducci (Eds.),Probability models and statistical analyses for ranking data (1–19). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Critchlow, D.E., Fligner, M., & Verducci, J. (1991). Probability models in rankings.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 35, 294–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croon, M.A. (1989). The analysis of partial rankings by log-linear and latent class model. In G. DeSoete, H. Feger, & K.C. Klauer (Eds.),New developments in psychological choice modeling (pp. 497–506). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayton, C.M., & MacReady, G.B. (1988). Concomitant variable latent class models.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 173–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, P.E., Murray, W., & Wright, M.H. (1981).Practical optimization. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J.A., & Ruud, P.A. (1987). Specifying and testing econometric models for rank-ordered data,Journal of Econometric, 34, 83–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedeker, D. (1999). MIXNO: A computer program for mixed-effects nominal logistic regression.Journal of Statistical Software, 4, 1–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedeker, D., & Gibbons, R. (1994). A random-effects ordinal regression model for multilevel data.Biometrics, 50, 933–944.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hojo, H. (1997). A marginalization model for the multidimensional unfolding analysis of ranking data.Japanese Psychological Research, 39, 33–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, W.A., & Mazzon, J.A. (1991). Value segmentation?: A model for the measurement of values and value systems.Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 208–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, W.A., Wedel, M., & Agrawal, J. (1994). Concomitant variable latent class models for conjoint analysis.International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11, 451–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerckhoff, A.C. (1972).Socialization and social class. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, M. (1969).Class and conformity: A study in values. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, M. (1976). Social class and parental values: Another confirmation of the relationship.American Sociological Review, 41, 538–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, M.L., & Slomczynski, K.M. (1990).Social structure and self-direction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R.D. (1959).Individual choice behavior. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynd, R., & Lynd, H. (1929).Middletown: A study in contemporary American culture. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marden, J.I. (1995).Analyzing and modeling rank data. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maydeu-Olivares, A. (1999). Thurstonian modeling of ranking data via mean and covariance structure analysis.Psychometrika, 64, 325–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh, P. (1993). Permutations and regression models. In M. Fligner & J. Verducci (Eds.),Probability models and statistical analyses for ranking data (pp. 196–215). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J.A. (1989).Generalized linear models. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Opinion Research Center (1987).General social surveys, 1972–1987: Cumulative codebook. Chicago: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plackett, R.L. (1975). The analysis of permutations.Applied Statistics, 24, 193–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samejima, F. (1972). A general models for free-response data.Psychometric Monograph, No. 18.

  • Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimensions of a model.Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverberg, A.R. (1984, August). Statistical models forq-permutations.Proceedings of the Biopharmaceutical Section, American Statistical Association, 107–112.

  • Stern, H. (1990). Models for distributions on permutations.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85, 558–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroud, A.H., & Secrest, D. (1966).Gaussian quadrature formulas. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takane, Y. (1987). Analysis of contingency tables by ideal point discriminant analysis.Psychometrika, 52, 493–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takane, Y. (1996). Choice model analysis of the “pick any/n” type of binary data.Japanese Psychological Research, 40, 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takane, Y., & Carroll, J.D. (1981). Nonmetric maximum likelihood multidimensional scaling from directional rankings of similarities.Psychometrika, 46, 389–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takane, Y. & de Leeuw, J. (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables.Psychometrika, 52, 393–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment.Psychological Review, 34, 273–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1931). Rank order as a psychophysical method.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 187–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., & Böckenholt, U. (1999). Bayesian estimation of Thurstonian ranking models based on the Gibbs sampler.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 52, 79–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Train, K. (1986).Qualitative choice analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Russo, J.E. (1969). Substitutability and similarity in binary choices.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J.D., & Wright, S.A. (1976). Social class and parental values for children: A partial replication and extension of the Kohn thesis.American Sociological Review, 41, 527–537.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, 61820, Champaign, IL

    Ulf Böckenholt

Authors
  1. Ulf Böckenholt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulf Böckenholt.

Additional information

The manuscript for this article was submitted and accepted during my tenure as the Editor ofPsychometrika. — Willem Heiser

This research was partially supported by NSF grant SBR-9730197. The author is grateful to Rung-Ching Tsai and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on this research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Böckenholt, U. Mixed-effects analyses of rank-ordered data. Psychometrika 66, 45–62 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295731

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295731

Key words

Search

Navigation