The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review of the Development of Multidimensional Scaling Methods
Abstract
Multidimensional scaling methods are now a common statistical tool in psychophysics and sensory analysis. The development of these methods is charted, from the original research of Torgerson (metric scaling), Shepard and Kruskal (non-metric scaling) through individual differences scaling and the maximum likelihood methods proposed by Ramsay. 1 Introduction-what is multidimensional scaling? The set of procedures referred to as multidimensional scaling methods are concerned with constructing a configuration of n points, usually in Euclidean space, from information about the pairwise 'distances' among a set of n objects or individuals. The initial research into multidimensional scaling methods was carried out by scientists working in psychophysics and sensory analysis, in which the objects are stimuli, and the distances between them are assessments of either their similarity or dissimilarity as made either by an individual or by a panel of judges. Most multidimensional scaling methods have been developed to analyse dissimilarities, and so, since similarities can be expressed as dissimilarities subtracted from a constant, I shall generally refer only to dissimilarities in the remainder of this review. The dissimilarities are usually presented in an (n x n) lower triangular matrix, the entry in the ith row andjth column being the dissimilarity, dij, between object i and objectj. In some cases the assessments of dissimilarity are not made directly, but are obtained from observations on p variables for each of the n objects. Appropriate methods for calculating such measures of similarity and dissimilarity are discussed by Chatfield & Collins (1980), section 10.2. Jardine & Sibson (1971) defined one class of dissimilarity functions, which they called 'dissimilarity coefficients', which are required to satisfy the following conditions:
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Guttman, L. (1968) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02290164 · Cited by 1,343
Cited by
A Survey on the Explainability of Supervised Machine Learning
Burkart, N., & Huber, M. F. (2021) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.12228 · Cited by 1,008
Sun, S., Zhu, J., Ma, Y., & Zhou, X. (2019) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-019-1898-6 · Cited by 225
Iturria-Medina, Y., Adewale, Q., Khan, A. F., Ducharme, S., Rosa-Neto, P., O’Donnell, K., Petyuk, V. A., Gauthier, S., De Jager, P. L., Breitner, J., et al. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abo6764 · Cited by 100
Metadata
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review of the Development of Multidimensional Scaling Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2348634
- The paper
- Mead, A. (1992). Review of the Development of Multidimensional Scaling Methods. The Statistician. https://doi.org/10.2307/2348634
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.