Study findings suggest that a modified rank order procedure may be superior to the anchor point procedure in gathering data for nonmetric multidimensional scaling studies. The rating scale method proved to be significantly faster than the anchor point method, yet it did not yield significantly less accurate results.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CarmoneFrank J., GreenPaul E., and RobinsonPatrick J.. “TRICON: An IBM 360/50 FORTRAN IV Program for the Triangularization of Conjoint Similarities Data,” Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (May 1968), 219–20.
2.
DayGeorge S. “The Threats to Marketing Research,” Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (November 1975), 462–7.
3.
DayGeorge S., DeutscherTerry, and RyansAdrian B.. “Data Quality, Level of Aggregation and Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling Solutions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 13 (February 1976), 92–7.
4.
EganD. M. “Evaluating Faculty Performance: An Academic and Managerial Dilemma,” paper presented at the Western Academy of Management meeting, Reno, Nevada, April 13, 1973.
5.
HeelerRoger M. “Measuring Advertising Effect by Perceptual Mapping: A Cautionary Tale,” inWardScott and WrightPeter, eds., Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 1. Urbana, Illinois: Association for Consumer Research, 1974, 192–200.
6.
HenryWalter A. and StumpfRobert V.. “Time and Accuracy Measures for Alternative Multidimensional Scaling Data Collection Methods,” Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (May 1975), 165–70.
7.
HomayounfarF. “Production of High Pressure Steam-Cured Calcium Silicate Building Materials from Mining Industry Waste Products—Part VI. Market Study.” Technical Report No. 138, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, September 1970.
8.
MoinpourReza, McCulloughJames M., and MacLachlanDouglas J.. “Time Changes in Perception: A Longitudinal Application of Multidimensional Scaling,” Journal of Marketing Research, 13 (August 1976), 245–53.
9.
NeidellLester A. “The Use of Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling in Marketing Analysis,” Journal of Marketing, 33 (October 1969), 37–43.
10.
RobertsMary Lou and TaylorJames R.. “Analyzing Proximity Judgments in an Experimental Design,” Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (February 1975), 68–72.
11.
RyansAdrian B. “Estimating Consumer Preferences for a New Durable Brand in an Established Product Class,” Journal of Marketing Research11 (November 1974), 434–43.
12.
TaylorJames R. and KinnearThomas C.. “Empirical Comparison of Alternative Methods for Collecting Proximity Judgments,” Proceedings, Fall Conference, American Marketing Association, 1969, 150–2.
