Skip to main content

Quantifying the Effect of Meaning Variation in Survey Analysis

  • Conference paper
Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2014 (ICANN 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8681))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 2888 Accesses

Abstract

Surveys are widely conducted as a means to obtain information on thoughts, opinions and feelings of people. The representativeness of a sample is a major concern in using surveys. In this article, we consider meaning variation which is another potentially remarkable but less studied source of problems. We use Grounded Intersubjective Concept Analysis (GICA) method to quantify meaning variation and demonstrate the effect on survey analysis through a case study in which food prices and food concepts are considered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Zechmeister, E.B., Shaughnessy, J.J., Zechmeister, J.S.: A practical introduction to research methods in psychology. McGraw-Hill (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Honkela, T., Raitio, J., Lagus, K., Nieminen, I.T., Honkela, N., Pantzar, M.: Subjects on objects in contexts: Using GICA method to quantify epistemological subjectivity. In: Proceedings of IJCNN 2012, pp. 1–9 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gärdenfors, P.: Conceptual Spaces. MIT Press (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Salton, G., Wong, A., Yang, C.S.: A vector space model for automatic indexing. Communications of the ACM 18(11), 613–620 (1975)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Sahlgren, M.: The Word-Space Model: Using distributional analysis to represent syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations between words in high-dimensional vector spaces. PhD thesis, Computational Linguistics, Stockholm University (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Honkela, T., Könönen, V., Lindh-Knuutila, T., Paukkeri, M.: Simulating processes of concept formation and communication. Journal of Economic Methodology 15(3), 245–259 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Grice, H.P.: Logic and conversation. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3. Academic Press, New York (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Herbert, H.: Clark and Susan E. Brennan. Grounding in communication. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition 13, 127–149 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Keysar, B., Barr, D.J., Balin, J.A., Brauner, J.S.: Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. Psychological Science 11(1), 32–38 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Eysenck, M.W., Keane, M.T.: Cognitive Psychology: A Student’s Handbook, 6th edn. Taylor & Francis Group (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bradburn, N.M., Sudman, S., Wansink, B.: Asking Questions: The Definitive Guide to Questionnaire Design – For Market Research, Political Polls, and Social and Health Questionnaires. Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Wiley (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Loftus, E.F., Palmer, J.C.: Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13(5), 585–589 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Honkela, T., Hyvärinen, A., Väyrynen, J.J.: WordICA – emergence of linguistic representations for words by independent component analysis. Natural Language Engineering 16, 277–308 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kolda, T.G., Bader, B.W.: Tensor decompositions and applications. SIAM Review 51(3), 455–500 (2009)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Bader, B.W., Kolda, T.G., et al.: Matlab tensor toolbox version 2.5. Available online (January 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kohonen, T.: Self-Organizing Maps. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Cohen, J.: Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge Academic (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hedges, L.V.: Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 6(2), 107–128 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sintonen, H., Raitio, J., Honkela, T. (2014). Quantifying the Effect of Meaning Variation in Survey Analysis. In: Wermter, S., et al. Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2014. ICANN 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8681. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11179-7_95

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11179-7_95

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11178-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11179-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics