Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

Click here for more information on The Virtual Advisor

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zimmerman, R.
Right arrow Articles by Farr, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

A Comparison of the Accuracy of Four Methods for Clustering Jobs

Ray Zimmerman

The Pennsylvania State University

Rick Jacobs

The Pennsylvania State University

James Farr

The Pennsylvania State University

Four methods of cluster analysis were examined for their accuracy in clustering simulated job analytic data. The methods included hierarchical mode analysis, Ward's method, k-means method from a random start, and k-means based on the results of Ward's method. Thirty data sets, which differed according to number of jobs, number of population clusters, number of job dimensions, degree of cluster separation, and size of population clusters, were generated using a monte carlo technique. The results from each of the four methods were then compared to actual classifications. The performance of hierarchical mode analysis was significantly poorer than that of the other three methods. Correlations were computed to determine the effects of the five data set variables on the accuracy of each method. From an applied perspective, these relationships indicate which method is most appropriate for a given data set. These results are discussed in the context of certain limitations of this investigation. Suggestions are also made regarding future directions for cluster analysis research.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 6, No. 3, 353-366 (1982)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168200600311
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?