- ∗ We gratefully acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation (Grant GS-2018) for data collection and processing, Professor Gerard Rushton (University of Iowa) graciously made the data for Iowa 1960 and Michigan 1966-1968 preference scale values available to us. Richard Buxbaum did considerable amount of work both in Mexico and at the Ohio State University above and beyond the terms of his research assistantship during various stages of the project in data collection and processing.
- 1 Gerard Rushton, “Analysis of Spatial Behavior by Revealed Space Preferences,”Annals, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 59 (1969), pp. 391 400; and Gerard Rushton, “Temporal Changes in Space Preference Structures,”Procedings, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 1 (1969), pp. 129 32.
- 2 J. Miller and R. Gackenheimer, Latin American Urban Policies and the Social Sciences (Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications, 1971), Chapter 1.
- 3 The basic document used was an estimate of population of individual villages and towns published by the State Electoral Commission, Commission Estatal Electoral del Padron y Vigilancia Electoral (Aguascalientes: Delegacion Estatal del Registro Nacional de Electores, Division Sectional, 1968).
- 4 The actual sampling ratio varied between 0.35 and 0.70 percent, with the bulk of the districts sampled falling within the 0.40 to 0.60 percent range.
- 5 A number of “internal check” questions were deliberately scattered through the questionnaire.
- 6 Gerard Rushton, “Preference and Choice in Different Environments,”Proceedings, Association of American Geographers, Vol. 3 (1971), p. 146.
- 7 Rushton, op. cit., footnote 1.
- 8 Reginald Golledge and Gerard Rushton, MultiDimensional Scaling: Review and Geographic Applications, Commissions on College Geography Technical Paper No. 10 (Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers, 1972).
- 9 The statistical basis and interpretation of revealed preference surfaces have been discussed in R. Kern and G. Rushton, “REVPREF: Paired Comparisons Analysis from Revealed Spatial Preference Data,” Computer Institute for Social Science Research Technical Report No. 95 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, May 1969); J. Kruskal, “Non-Metric Multi-dimensional Scaling: A Numerical Method,”Psychometrika, Vol. 59 (1964), pp. 115 29; and R. N. Shepard et al., eds., Multidimensional Scaling Theory and Applications in the Behavioral Sciences (New York: Seminal Press, 1972), Vols. 1 and 2.
- 10 Rushton (Proceedings), op. cit., footnote 1.
- 11 Rushton (Proceddings), op. cit., footnote 1, p. 131.
- 12 The awkward statistical problems of using linear estimates for curvilinear functions are recognized, although a simple log-linear model resulted in a poorer fit (R2) than did the simple linear model.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers
Volume 65, 1975 - Issue 4