Journal: Food Quality and Preference, vol. 58, p. 45–60, 2017
International Standard Numbers:
Open Access: none
In this paper a general framework is proposed for understanding and analysing more than two consensus components in projective mapping (also known as Napping®) studies. Focus is on how two models, multiple factor analysis (MFA) and individual differences scaling (INDSCAL) based on the weighted Euclidean model (WEM), relate to each other and to the general framework. The stability of the consensus configurations of both methods are compared. The relations between the results of the two methods are investigated using the RV coefficient and an alternative index called SMI which gives equal weight to the axes regardless of the relative size of the singular values. The methods are tested and compared using three datasets and simulations.