more info on mystery
Alison Clack Mallard (CMSPSY02@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU)
Mon, 21 Aug 1995 10:17:28 EDT
Thank you for your responses to my previous inquiry regarding my cluster
results. Several of you have asked that I provide information on how
I clustered these results (e.g., what the clustering variables were) so that
you could make sense out of the clusters. I will be happy to do that, but
first, let me explain why I didn't originally.
I am trying to determine whether the cluster results I obtained make sense.
In other words, are these clusters consistent with any other criteria (e.g.,
SES, language, original settlement, etc.). I have compared the results to
Hofstede's cultural axes, and my cluster solutions are not consistent with
a cluster analysis I did using the 4 dimensional ratings of Hofstede's.
If they do make sense, then this will provide support for my findings. If
they do not, then one may argue that the data I used to perform the cluster
analysis may be meaningless and fairly random.
Now, more background:
I received data from Dr. Alex Michalos at the University of Guelph. He
had collected data on 30+ countries. The data included satisfaction ratings
on 11 life facets (health, transportation, religion, education, living
partner, etc.) and overall life satisfaction (OLS). I clustered the countries
according to the type of relationship each life facet had with OLS: a) OLS
leads to satisfaction in life facet, b) satisfaction in life facet leads to
OLS, c) bidirectional relationship, and d) no significant relationship
between OLS and life facet.
I determined the type of OLS/life facet relationship by doing confirmatory
factor analysis (I will be happy to elaborate if you are interested).
So, the results I have are based on the OLS/life facet relationships,
and I would like to determine whether these results make sense. If they are
consistant with already known criteria, then my results may be supported.
Again, the clusters are
Group one: Belgium, Jordan, Sweden
Group two: Austria, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand
Group three: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Puerto Rico, Spain
Group four: Brazil, Norway, Tanzania
Group five: Cameroon, Canada, United States
Group six: Egypt, Japan, Korea
Group seven: Finland, Israel, Thailand, Turkey
Group eight: Greece, Philippines, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia (data were
collected a few years ago)
Again, the question is, what do these countries have in common?
If you made it this far, I sincerely appreciate your interest! Again, I
will summarize the responses I receive!
Alison G. C. Mallard
Dept. of Psychology