The Point of Continuity Property: Descriptive Complexity and Ordinal Index

∗ Supported by D.G.I.C.Y.T. Project No. PB93-1142

Scoring Methods for Ordinal Multidimensional Forced-Choice Items

In most psychological tests and questionnaires, a test score is obtained by taking the sum of the item scores. In virtually all cases where the test or questionnaire contains multidimensional forced-choice items, this traditional scoring method is also applied. We argue that the summation of scores obtained with multidimensional forced-choice items produces uninterpretable test scores. Therefore, we propose three alternative scoring methods: a weak and a strict rank preserving scoring method, which both allow an ordinal interpretation of test scores; and a ratio preserving scoring method, which allows a proportional interpretation of test scores. Each proposed scoring method yields an index for each respondent indicating the degree to which the response pattern is inconsistent. Analysis of real data showed that with respect to rank preservation, the weak and strict rank preserving method resulted in lower inconsistency indices than the traditional scoring method; with respect to ratio preservation, the ratio preserving scoring method resulted in lower inconsistency indices than the traditional scoring method

El aprendizaje del n??mero natural en un contexto ordinal en la Educaci??n Infantil

Resumen basado en el de la publicaci??n

La ense??anza del n??mero cardinal y ordinal en Educaci??n infantil

Resumen basado en el de la publicaci??n

Uma proposta de demarcação da análise descritiva do comportamento ordinal no contexto da literatura operante

A portion of operant literature supports significant production of knowledge about problem solving, observation response and contingency relations between responses with different probabilities of occurrence (Premack Principle). This study investigated possible convergences between a descriptive analysis of ordinal behavior and such portion of the operant literature. Conceptual and methodological analysis of publications have highlighted the relevance of the sequence of events functionally related to the characterization of the production of knowledge about problem solving, observation response and the Premack Principle enabling approaches between programs of research on complex behavioral repertoires as well as expansions in research strategies concerning ordinal responding.

Calculation of sample size for stroke trials assessing functional outcome: comparison of binary and ordinal approaches

Background Many acute stroke trials have given neutral results. Sub-optimal statistical analyses may be failing to detect efficacy. Methods which take account of the ordinal nature of functional outcome data are more efficient. We compare sample size calculations for dichotomous and ordinal outcomes for use in stroke trials. Methods Data from stroke trials studying the effects of interventions known to positively or negatively alter functional outcome – Rankin Scale and Barthel Index – were assessed. Sample size was calculated using comparisons of proportions, means, medians (according to Payne), and ordinal data (according to Whitehead). The sample sizes gained from each method were compared using Friedman 2 way ANOVA. Results Fifty-five comparisons (54 173 patients) of active vs. control treatment were assessed. Estimated sample sizes differed significantly depending on the method of calculation (Po00001). The ordering of the methods showed that the ordinal method of Whitehead and comparison of means produced significantly lower sample sizes than the other methods. The ordinal data method on average reduced sample size by 28% (inter-quartile range 14–53%) compared with the comparison of proportions; however, a 22% increase in sample size was seen with the ordinal method for trials assessing thrombolysis. The comparison of medians method of Payne gave the largest sample sizes. Conclusions Choosing an ordinal rather than binary method of analysis allows most trials to be, on average, smaller by approximately 28% for a given statistical power. Smaller trial sample sizes may help by reducing time to completion, complexity, and financial expense. However, ordinal methods may not be optimal for interventions which both improve functional outcome

On Ordinal VC-Dimension and Some Notions of Complexity

We generalize the classical notion of Vapnik–Chernovenkis (VC) dimension to ordinal VC-dimension, in the context of logical learning paradigms. Logical learning paradigms encompass the numerical learning paradigms commonly studied in Inductive Inference. A logical learning paradigm is defined as a set W of structures over some vocabulary, and a set D of first-order formulas that represent data. The sets of models of ϕ in W, where ϕ varies over D, generate a natural topology W over W. We show that if D is closed under boolean operators, then the notion of ordinal VC-dimension offers a perfect characterization for the problem of predicting the truth of the members of D in a member of W, with an ordinal bound on the number of mistakes. This shows that the notion of VC-dimension has a natural interpretation in Inductive Inference, when cast into a logical setting. We also study the relationships between predictive complexity, selective complexity—a variation on predictive complexity—and mind change complexity. The assumptions that D is closed under boolean operators and that W is compact often play a crucial role to establish connections between these concepts. We then consider a computable setting with effective versions of the complexity measures, and show that the equivalence between ordinal VC-dimension and predictive complexity fails. More precisely, we prove that the effective ordinal VC-dimension of a paradigm can be defined when all other effective notions of complexity are undefined. On a better note, when W is compact, all effective notions of complexity are defined, though they are not related as in the noncomputable version of the framework.