Different ranking methods: potentialities and pitfalls for the case of European opinion poll

• Published in: Environmental and ecological statistics Vol. 14; no. 4; pp. 453 - 471
• Main Author: Annoni, Paola
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Boston : Springer US 01.12.2007; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Hasse diagram; Methods; Multiple ranking; Nonlinear PCA; Partial order; POSAC; Posets; prioritization; Risk assessment; Services of general interest; Studies
• ISSN: 1352-8505; 1573-3009
• DOI: 10.1007/s10651-007-0041-0

Prioritization and ranking of objects are primary needs in various substantive fields. It might be said that ranking and comparison are the first step in every risk assessment procedure, whatever the 'risk' is intended as: social, environmental, political or economic. Often objects to be ranked are valued by a multi-dimensional attribute which is usually transformed into a composite numerical score. In spite of conventional solutions, the author agrees with recent recommendations of performing multiple ranking, keeping indicators separated. Different innovative methods are analyzed and compared: Hasse diagrams method, POSAC and Nonlinear PCA. The first one stems directly from partial order theory, the second one may be seen as an approximation of Hasse representation in a two dimensional space, whilst the third one belongs to the wide set of non-linear multivariate techniques and it is particularly suitable in handling data of categorical type. Among them, the first two methods compare objects on the basis only on order property of data, whilst the last one simultaneously performs an optimal scale of qualitative attributes and a ranking of objects. The case study is based on the Eurobarometer survey carried out in 2002, at the request of the European Commission, which collects Europeans opinion about various political and social issues. The analysis is focused on users' level of satisfaction about access easiness, cost, quality, information received and contracts of various services of general interest, such as telephone services, power (gas and electricity) providers, water and postal utilities, urban and rail transports. Separate indicators are set up for each facet of each service within different European regions. Eventually, the ranking of European regions is performed on the basis of the overall performance of services of general interest, as perceived by users. Selected methods lead to almost alike results, still with some differentiations due to different approaches used. As it frequently occurs, each method has its own advantages and pitfalls which are here explored and compared.