Abstract
The use of simple and multiple correspondence analysis is well established in social science research for understanding relationships between two or more categorical variables. By contrast, canonical correspondence analysis, which is a correspondence analysis with linear restrictions on the solution, has become one of the most popular multivariate techniques in ecological research. This restricted form of correspondence analysis can be used profitably in social science research as well, as is demonstrated in this paper. We first illustrate the result that canonical correspondence analysis of an indicator matrix, restricted to be related to an external categorical variable, reduces to a simple correspondence analysis of a set of concatenated (or “stacked”) tables. Then we show how canonical correspondence analysis can be used to focus on, or partial out, a particular set of response categories in sample survey data. For example, the method can be used to partial out the influence of missing responses, which usually dominate the results of a multiple correspondence analysis.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Greenacre, M. (2007). Correspondence Analysis in Practice (2nd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2007. Published in Spanish translation as La Práctica del Análisis de Correspondencias, Fundación BBVA, Madrid.
Greenacre, M., & Pardo, R. (2006). Subset correspondence analysis: Visualization of selected response categories in a questionnaire survey. Sociological Methods and Research, 35, 193–218.
Greenacre, M., & Pardo, R. (2006). Multiple correspondence analysis of subsets of response categories. In M. Greenacre & J. Blasius (Eds.), Multiple correspondence analysis and related methods (pp. 197–217). London: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.
Greenacre, M., & Pardo, R. (2008). Positioning the “middle” categories in survey research: A multidimensional approach. Keynote address at the joint conference of the European Methodology Association and the SMABS, Oviedo, Spain.
ISSP. (1994). Family and changing gender roles II. International social survey programme.
Matschinger, H., & Angermeyer, M. C. (2006). The evaluation of “dont know” responses by generalized canonical analysis. In M. Greenacre & J. Blasius (Eds.), Multiple correspondence analysis and related methods (pp. 283–298). London: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.
Nishisato, S. (1984). Forced classification: A simple application of a quantification technique. Psychometrika, 49, 25–36.
Ter Braak, C. J. F. (1986). Canonical correspondence analysis: A new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology, 67, 1167–1179.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Greenacre, M. (2010). Canonical Correspondence Analysis in Social Science Research. In: Locarek-Junge, H., Weihs, C. (eds) Classification as a Tool for Research. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10745-0_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10745-0_30
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-10744-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-10745-0
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)