Nonmetric individual differences multidimensional scaling: An alternating least squares method with optimal scaling features

Takane, Yoshio; Young, Forrest W.; Leeuw, Jan de

doi:10.1007/bf02293745

Cited by 859 publications

(413 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

393

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This matrix was derived by subjecting participants' similarity ratings of emotion words to an individual-differences multidimensional scaling (INDSCAL) analysis using the ALSCAL procedure (Takane, Young, & DeLeeuw, 1976 emotion-related terms fell in a circular order around two dimensions. An inspection of this group solution suggested that one axis represented the valence denoted by the emotion terms, and the other corresponded to the level of arousal.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valence Focus and the Perception of Facial Affect.

Barrett¹,

Niedenthal²

2004

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals differ in the extent to which they emphasize feelings of pleasure or displeasure in their verbal reports of emotional experience, an individual difference termed valence focus (VF). This multimethod study indicates that VF is linked to heightened efficiency in perceptual processing of affective stimuli. Individuals higher in VF (i.e., who emphasized feelings of pleasure/displeasure in reports of emotional experiences) were more sensitive to changes in negative facial expressions than individuals lower in VF. The effect was not accounted for by current affective state or other personality characteristics. Implications for the validity of self-reported experienced emotion are discussed.Valence is a basic property of affect (Russell & Feldman Barrett, 1999). When reporting their experience, individuals differ in the extent to which they emphasize this property, reflecting individual differences in valence focus (VF;Feldman, 1995;, 2004. For example, the word tired, defined as unpleasant and low in arousal, can be used to communicate feeling sleepy (emphasizing low arousal), annoyed and miserable (emphasizing the unpleasantness), or fatigued (emphasizing both low arousal and displeasure). An individual high in VF uses emotion adjectives primarily to communicate pleasure and displeasure, whereas someone low in VF does this less so and uses emotion adjectives to communicate other properties of feelings as well. The measurement of VF is implicit because participants are not asked directly about their attention to pleasure and displeasure. Rather, VF is defined as the extent to which participants focus on the pleasant or unpleasant property of the adjectives when making self-reports of experienced emotion.At a conceptual level, it is assumed that differential emphasis on valence during the self-report process reflects differential experience of pleasure and displeasure. A reasonable hypothesis is that people differ in their sensitivity to valenced information in the environment and, as a result, differ in the intensity and frequency of experienced pleasure and displeasure. Differential experience leads to differential word use, resulting in VF. Perceptual Sensitivity to Valenced InformationWe examined the link between VF and perceptual sensitivity to valenced information by relying on a "morph movies" task (Niedenthal, Brauer, Halberstadt, & Innes-Ker, 2001; Niedenthal, Brauer, Robin, & Innes-Ker, 2002; Niedenthal, Halberstadt, Margolin, & InnesKer, 2000). In the present version of the task, participants played 100-frame computerized movies in which a face displaying a neutral expression gradually changed to display a clear emotional expression (either angry, sad, or happy). The participants used a computerized mouse to control the speed with which each movie played and to stop each movie at the point where, for the first time, an emotional expression appeared on the face (i.e., the onset point).The morph movies task was useful for studying the link between VF and perceptual sensitivity to valenced ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valence Focus and the Perception of Facial Affect.

Barrett¹,

Niedenthal²

2004

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…INDSCAL weights have been used to index differential attention in previously published studies (e.g., Fazio & Dunton, 1997;Halberstadt & Niedenthal, 1997). In this study, the INDSCAL weights indexed individual differences in the semantic representation of emotionrelated words.The pre-and postsampling similarity ratings of emotion-related words were subjected to separate INDSCAL analyses using the ALSCAL procedure (Takane, Young, & DeLeeuw, 1976). The primary approach to ties (allowing data to become untied) was used in the analysis because it typically results in a better fit to the data (Davison, 1983, p. 86).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feelings or Words? Understanding the Content in Self-Report Ratings of Experienced Emotion.

Barrett

2004

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

347

318

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People differ in the extent to which their verbal reports of experienced emotion are valence focused or arousal focused. Three multimethod studies are reported to explore whether differential focus reflects individual differences in the cognitive structure of emotion language versus differences in phenomenological experience. Although there was some evidence that valence focus and arousal focus were linked to variations differences in cognitive structure, the findings are also consistent with the view that self-report ratings are being driven by the properties of the feelings that are being reported. Implications for the study of experienced emotion are discussed.People report how they feel using words. In everyday life, when we want to know how someone is feeling, we ask. "How are you feeling?" is one of the most ubiquitous questions in our culture. Likewise, for over half a century, psychologists have relied on self-reports to find out how people feel, and for good reason. Decades of behavioral, cognitive, and psychophysiological research have failed to provide clear and consistent measures that unambiguously correspond to the categories of experienced emotion that are found in Western cultures (e.g., anger, sadness, fear): There are neither distinct autonomic footprints for categories of emotion (Cacioppo, Berntson, Larsen, Poehlmann, & Ito, 2000) nor direct connections between the experience of these emotions and facial movements that are perceived as coordinated "expressions" (Russell, Bachorowski, & Fernández-Dols, 2003). 1 As a result, there is no known objective, external measure of the subjective, internal events that we experience as anger, sadness, fear, and so on. If we want to know whether people feel these emotions, we have to ask them.When self-reports are treated as verbal behaviors that can be observed and studied, people use the same emotion words in very different ways to communicate their feelings. For example, the word tired, which is generally understood to refer to a state that is unpleasant and low in arousal, can be used to communicate a feeling of sleepiness (emphasizing the low arousal property), annoyance and misery (as in "I am tired of this," emphasizing the unpleasantness), or fatigued (emphasizing both low arousal and displeasure properties). A key question facing researchers is whether differences in self-report ratings of experienced emotion reflect differences in actual feelings or merely reflect differences in the way that people understand the words that are used in the rating process. One way to address the question of whether selfreports reflect feelings or language is to examine the granularity in such reports. When asked to report how they feel, some individuals represent their experiences with a good deal of precision (high granularity), whereas others represent their experiences in more global terms (low granularity, primarily in terms of pleasure or displeasure). This article examines whether Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Lisa F...

show abstract

“…In a first step, multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) using the ALSCAL algorithm (Takane, Young, & de Leeuw, 1977;Young, Takane, & Lewyckyij, 1978) is performed. For this, a distance matrix is developed for the content concepts, for which the process concepts serve as variables.…”

Section: Figure 1 Means Of Content and Process Concepts (N=24) Sortementioning

confidence: 99%

Educational measures to computer science concepts: Degree of process-related coverage and degree of educational accessibility

Zendler¹

2016

IJRSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents two measures to assess computer science content concepts from an educational point of view. The two measures are the degree of process-related coverage and the degree of educational accessibility. While the degree of process-related coverage determines the significance of process concepts for content concepts, the degree of educational accessibility can be understood as the degree to which content concepts are built upon other content concepts. The application of the two measures demonstrates how computer science content concepts can be semantically positioned so that conclusions can be drawn for their application in competence-oriented computer science education.

show abstract

Nonmetric individual differences multidimensional scaling: An alternating least squares method with optimal scaling features

Abstract: Euclidian model, INDSCAL, measurement, similarities, data analysis, similarities data, quantification, successive block algorithm,

Cited by 859 publications

References 42 publications

Valence Focus and the Perception of Facial Affect.

Valence Focus and the Perception of Facial Affect.

Feelings or Words? Understanding the Content in Self-Report Ratings of Experienced Emotion.

Educational measures to computer science concepts: Degree of process-related coverage and degree of educational accessibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About