Abstract
Group concept mapping, a participatory mixed-methods approach used extensively in behavioral and social research, is used to specify and generate a two-dimensional conceptual model based on input solicited from an identified group. In situations where the systematic evaluation of the multidimensional conceptualized patterns generated by different subgroups is meaningful, little guidance exists. This paper contrasts two analytical approaches, configural similarity comparison and Procrustes comparison, emphasizing the latter as a more rigorous and appropriate technique for facilitating such comparisons. As demonstrated in this study, Procrustes analysis provides a solid statistical and interpretative foundation to measuring the similarity of MDS configurations found in concept mapping output. Paired with a permutation strategy for assessing significance and examination of residual values, Procrustes analysis offers an objective means to evaluate the general concordance of multivariate patterns generated through group concept mapping. Statistical and visual techniques are also used to further explore the specific patterns of residual values generated in the Procrustes comparison. From this demonstration, a procedure for testing the correspondence between multiple two-dimensional concept maps where the same content is considered by independent groups is suggested.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahlgren, P., Jarneving, B., Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson’s correlation coefficient. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 54(6), 550–560 (2003)
Aldenderfer, M.S., Blashfield, R.K. (1984). Cluster Analysis. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 07-044
Borg, I., Leutner, D.: Measuring the similarity of MDS configurations. Multivar. Behav. Res. 20, 325–334 (1985)
Davis, J.E.: Construct validity in measurement: a pattern matching approach. Eval. Program Plan. 12(1), 31–36 (1989)
Dumont, J.: Validity of multidimensional scaling in the context of structure conceptualization. Eval. Program Plan. 12(1), 81–86 (1989)
Dutilleul, P., Stockwell, J.D., Frigon, D., Legendre, P.: The Mantel test versus Pearson’s correlation analysis: assessment of the differences for biological and environmental studies. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 5(2), 131–150 (2000)
Goldman, A.W., Mulford, C.F., Blachman-Demner, D.R.: Advancing our approach to teen dating violence: a youth and professional defined framework of teen dating relationships. Psychol. Violence (2015). doi:10.1037/a0039849
Gower, J.C.: A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics 27(4), 857–871 (1971)
Gower, J.C., Dijksterhuis, G.B.: Procrustes problems, vol. 3. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2004)
Hammarlund, C.S., Nilsson, M.H., Idvall, M., Rosas, S.R., Hagell, P.: Conceptualizing and prioritizing clinical trial outcomes from the perspectives of people with Parkinson’s disease versus health care professionals: a concept mapping study. Qual. Life Res. 23(6), 1687–1700 (2014)
Jackson, D.A.: PROTEST: a PROcrustean randomization TEST of community environment concordance. Ecoscience 2(3), 297–303 (1995)
Kane, M., Trochim, W.M.K.: Concept mapping for applied social research. In: Bickman, L., Rog, D. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods, pp. 435–474. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2009)
Kane, M., Trochim, W.M.K.: Concept Mapping for Planning and Evaluation. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2007)
King, J.R., Jackson, D.A.: Variable selection in large environmental data sets using principal components analysis. Environmetrics 10(1), 67–77 (1999)
Kruskal, J.B.: Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika 29(1), 1–27 (1964)
Kruskal, J.B., Wish, M.: Multidimensional Scaling, vol. 11. Sage, Newbury Park (1978)
Marquart, J.M.: A pattern matching approach to assess the construct validity of an evaluation instrument. Eval. Program Plan. 12(1), 37–43 (1989)
McGrath, R.E.: Conceptual complexity and construct validity. J. Pers. Assess. 85(2), 112–124 (2005)
Peres-Neto, P.R., Jackson, D.A.: How well do multivariate data sets match? The advantages of a Procrustean superimposition approach over the Mantel test. Oecologia 129, 169–178 (2001)
Ramsay, J.O., ten Berge, J., Styan, G.P.H.: Matrix correlation. Psychometrika 49(3), 403–423 (1984)
Rosas, S.R., Kane, M.: Quality and rigor of the concept mapping methodology: a pooled study analysis. Eval. Program Plan. 35(2), 236–245 (2012)
Schneider, J.W., Borlund, P.: Matrix comparison, Part 2: measuring the resemblance between proximity measures or ordination results by use of the Mantel and Procrustes statistics. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 58(11), 1596–1609 (2007a)
Schneider, J.W., Borlund, P.: Matrix comparison, Part 1: motivation and important issues for measuring the resemblance between proximity measures or ordination results. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 58(11), 1586–1595 (2007b)
Shepard, R.N.: Metric structures in ordinal data. J. Math. Psychol. 3, 287–300 (1966)
Sibson, R.: Studies in the robustness of multidimensional scaling: Procrustes statistics. J. R. Stat. Soc. 40(2), 234–238 (1978)
Trochim, W.M.: Pattern matching, validity, and conceptualization in program evaluation. Eval. Rev. 9(5), 575–604 (1985)
Trochim, W.M.K.: An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Eval. Program Plan. 12(1), 1–16 (1989a)
Trochim, W.M.: Outcome pattern matching and program theory. Eval. Program Plan. 12(4), 355–366 (1989b)
Young, F.W.: Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: recovery of metric information. Psychometrika 36, 455–473 (1970)
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Dr. Carrie Mulford at the U.S. Office of Justice Programs for permission to access and use the data set from the Teen Dating Violence study. In addition I thank Dr. Martin Cloutier for his valuable input and suggestions on previous drafts of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rosas, S.R. Multi-map comparison for group concept mapping: an approach for examining conceptual congruence through spatial correspondence. Qual Quant 51, 2421–2439 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0399-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0399-x