David B. MacKay
Indiana University
40 Papers
669 Citations
David B. MacKay is an academic researcher from Indiana University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Probabilistic logic & Multidimensional scaling. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 40 publications. Previous affiliations of David B. MacKay include Marquette University.
Chat about Author
Papers
Probabilistic multidimensional scaling: Complete and incomplete data
Joseph L. Zinnes,David B. MacKay +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, simple procedures are described for obtaining maximum likelihood estimates of the location and uncertainty parameters of the Hefner model, a probabilistic, multidimensional scaling model, which assigns a multivariate normal distribution to each stimulus point.
93
A Probabilistic Model for the Multidimensional Scaling of Proximity and Preference Data
David B. MacKay,Joseph L. Zinnes +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, a probabilistic multidimensional scaling model that estimates both location and variance parameters for proximity and preference data is described and compared to a deterministic scaling model.
75
A Single Ideal Point Model for Market Structure Analysis
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors show that computing unsegmented product maps from preference data by means of single ideal point models is impossible because of indeterminacy problems, and they show that this problem can be solved by using a set of point models.
48
Cognitive Maps and Spatial Behavior Of Consumers
TL;DR: In this paper, two multidimensional scaling algorithms are used to externally measure cognitive maps of supermarket locations for a sample of sixty-one supermarket shoppers, and the relationship between the derived cognitive maps and consumer behavior is compared to the relationships between physical maps and consumers' behavior.
47
On the Validity and Reliability of Direct Similarity Judgments
John O. Summers,David B. MacKay +1 more
TL;DR: The writers raise several conceptual issues concerning direct similarity judgments and provide data on their reliability and validity and the results present a discouraging view of these judgments as measures of individual perceptions.
43