CAML—Maximum likelihood consensus analysis

Aßfalg, André; Erdfelder, Edgar

doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0138-0

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This allows a direct statistical comparison of a one-group model versus two-group model. Using TCS to measure fit has the further advantage of being independent of the particular method by which competence scores are derived, which is relevant given the rise of a range of other estimation methods currently available (Anders and Batchelder 2012; Aßfalg and Erdfelder 2012; Karabatsos and Batchelder 2003; Oravecz, Vandekerckhove, et al 2014). TCS is the sum of informant competence scores as estimated from a conventional one-group/key cultural consensus model, formally represented as:…”

Section: Tcs and A Comparison Of Two Known Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Formal Method for Detecting and Describing Cultural Complexity

Lacy

Snodgrass²,

Meyer

et al. 2018

Field Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The most widely used formal approach to culture, the cultural consensus theory (CCT) of Romney, Weller, and Batchelder, originally relied on a priori definitions of cultural groups to map their unity and diversity. Retaining key features of classical CCT, we provide techniques to identify two or more cultural subgroups in a sample, whether those groups are known in advance or not. Our method helps CCT practitioners connect to contemporary approaches to culture in anthropology and related disciplines, which emphasize complexity. We suggest that our method provides reasonable and easily implementable approximations of cultural unity and diversity

show abstract

Section: Tcs and A Comparison Of Two Known Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Formal Method for Detecting and Describing Cultural Complexity

Lacy

Snodgrass²,

Meyer

et al. 2018

Field Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alternatively, there are several non-Bayesian packages for CCT applications that have been recently developed as well: First, there are CAML (Aßfalg & Erdfelder, 2012) and AnthroTools (Purzycki & Jamieson-Lane, 2017), which also fit simplified model versions of the GCM (restrictions to single culture) using maximum-likelihood methods as discussed in the first CCT packages; and furthermore, AnthroTools offers modeling methods for free-listing response data. Second, FlexCCT (France, Vaghefi, & Batchelder, 2013) is available, and can fit continuous responses to the single-culture case using maximum-likelihood methods, with two basic response bias options.…”

Section: Recent Non-bayesian Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consensus Analysis for Populations With Latent Subgroups: Applying Multicultural Consensus Theory and Model-Based Clustering With CCTpack

Anders

Alario

Batchelder

2017

Cross-Cultural Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advanced consensus analyses are made available with the cultural consensus theory (CCT) framework, which is a model-based methodology used to closely derive the consensus knowledge of a group or population (e.g., a culture). The relevant data are their questionnaire responses about a subject domain. CCT has been established as a main methodology for ethnographic studies in social and cultural anthropology, and it has also been incorporated into other areas of the social and behavioral sciences as an effective information-pooling methodology. Recently, there are major advances in CCT, including (a) the multicultural extension, which can detect latent subgroups of a population, each with their own consensus answers to the questionnaire items; (b) the development of new models for several questionnaire designs, true/false, ordered category (Likert) scales, and

show abstract

“…Cognitive anthropologists thus use a multi‐method approach that applies descriptive, exploratory, and analytical explanatory methods, and they have also developed methods that combine both perspectives (e.g., Boster, 2011; Weller & Romney, 1988). Cultural Consensus Analysis , for example, was developed to assess culturally shared knowledge (Romney, Weller, & Batchelder, 1986), and it has already inspired other fields (e.g., Aßfalg & Erdfelder, 2012).…”

Section: Who Needs Them?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Anthropologists: Who Needs Them?

Rothe¹

2012

Topics in Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last decades, the cognitive sciences and cognitive anthropology have increasingly veered away from each other. Cognitive anthropologists have become so rare within the cognitive sciences that Beller, Bender, and Medin (this issue) even propose a division of the cognitive sciences and cognitive anthropology. However, such a divorce might be premature. This commentary tries to illustrate the benefits that cognitive anthropologists have to offer, not despite, but because of their combination of humanistic and scientific elements. It argues that the cognitive sciences (among others) profit from these benefits, as culture will become crucial for cognitive research. At the same time, problems within cognitive anthropology are discussed, including, for example, the responsibility of cognitive anthropologists to promote young academics. Finally, ideas are presented that might support future interdisciplinary collaboration.

show abstract

CAML—Maximum likelihood consensus analysis

Cited by 16 publications

References 53 publications

A Formal Method for Detecting and Describing Cultural Complexity

A Formal Method for Detecting and Describing Cultural Complexity

Consensus Analysis for Populations With Latent Subgroups: Applying Multicultural Consensus Theory and Model-Based Clustering With CCTpack

Cognitive Anthropologists: Who Needs Them?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About