Population recovery capabilities of 35 cluster analysis methods

Comparative evaluation of population recovery capabilities of 35 cluster analysis methods defined by different combinations of 5 profile similarity measures and 7 agglomeration rules was undertaken using artificial data that represented duplicate mixture samples from 4 latent populations. The latent...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical psychology 1993-07, Vol.49 (4), p.459-470
Main Authors: Overall, John E., Gibson, Janet M., Novy, Diane M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Analysis of Variance
Biological and medical sciences
Cluster Analysis
Evaluation
Humans
Medical sciences
Methodology
Models, Statistical
Multivariate Analysis
Population
Psychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Social research
Statistics
Techniques and methods
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Comparative evaluation of population recovery capabilities of 35 cluster analysis methods defined by different combinations of 5 profile similarity measures and 7 agglomeration rules was undertaken using artificial data that represented duplicate mixture samples from 4 latent populations. The latent population mean profiles differed primarily in elevation or in 'pattern parameters. Latent population sampling variances were controlled to provide two different levels of realistic overlap. The within‐population distributions were multivariate normal with diagonal covariance structure. Across all conditions examined, complete linkage and Ward's minimum variance methods, used with Euclidian or city block interprofile distance measures, performed best. Single linkage, median, and centroid methods were substantially inferior for clustering individuals in accordance with true population memberships.
ISSN:0021-9762
1097-4679
DOI:10.1002/1097-4679(199307)49:4<459::AID-JCLP2270490402>3.0.CO;2-P