Browse > Article

Effects of the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP) on a Spatial Interaction Model  

Kim, Kam-Young (Department of Geography Education, Kyungpook National University)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Geographical Society / v.46, no.2, 2011 , pp. 197-211 More about this Journal
Abstract
Due to the complexity of spatial interaction and the necessity of spatial representation and modeling, aggregation of spatial interaction data is indispensible. Given this, the purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effects of modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) on a spatial interaction model. Four aggregation schemes are utilized at eight different scales: 1) randomly select seeds of district and then allocate basic spatial units to them, 2) minimize the sum of population weighted distance within a district, 3) maximize the proportion of flow within a district, and 4) minimize the proportion of flow within a district. A simple Poisson regression model with origin and destination constraints is utilized. Analysis results demonstrate that spatial characteristics of residuals, parameter values, and goodness-of-fit of the model were influenced by aggregation scale and schemes. Overall, the model responded more sensitively to aggregation scale than aggregation schemes and the scale effect on the model was varied according to aggregation schemes.
Keywords
Poisson regression model; aggregation scale and schemes; modifiable areal unit problem(MAUP); spatial interaction data;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Webber, M. J., 1980, A theoretical analysis of aggregation in spatial interaction models, Geographical Analysis, 12(2), 129-141.
2 Slater, P. B., 1976, A hierarchical regionalization of Japanese prefectures using 1972 interprefectural migration flows, Regional Studies, 10(1), 123- 132.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Slater, P. B., 1981, Comparisons of aggregation procedures for interaction data: An illustration using a college student international flow table, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 15(1), 1-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Teitz, M. B. and Bart, P., 1968, Heuristic Methods for Estimating the Generalized Vertex Median of a Weighted Graph, Operations Research, 16(5), 955-961.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Tiefelsdorf, M. and Boots, B., 1995, The specification of constrained interaction models using the SPSS loglinear procedure, Geographical Systems, 2, 21-38.
6 Tiefelsdorf, M., 2003, Misspecifications in interaction model distance decay relations: a spatial structure effect, Journal of Geographical Systems, 5(1), 25-50.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Openshaw, S., 1977b, Optimal zoning systems for spatial interaction models, Environment and Planning A, 9(2), 169-184.   DOI
8 Putman, S. H. and Chung, S-H., 1989, Effects of spatial system design on spatial interaction models. 1: The spatial system definition problem, Environment and Planning A, 21(1), 27-46.   DOI
9 Ravenstein, E. G., 1885, The laws of migration, Journal of the Statistical Society of London, 48(2), 167- 235.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Openshaw, S., 1977a, A geographical solution to scale and aggregation problems in region-building, partitioning, and spatial modelling, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, NewSeries2, 459-472.   DOI
11 Lee, S., 1999, The delineation of function regions and modifiable areal unit problem, Journal of Geographical and Environmental Education, 7(2), 757-783 (in Korean).
12 Masser, I. and Scheurwater, J., 1980, Functional regionalisation of spatial interaction data: an evaluation of some suggested strategies, Environment and Planning A, 12(12), 1357- 1382.   DOI
13 LeSage, J. P. and Pace, R. K., 2008, Spatial econometric modeling of origin-destination flows, Journal of Regional Science, 48(5), 941-967.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Masser, I. and Brown, P. J. B. (eds.), 1978, Spatial Representation and Spatial Interaction, Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division, Boston.
15 Masser, I. and Brown, P. J. B., 1975, Hierarchical aggregation procedures for interaction data, Environment and Planning A, 7(5), 509-523.   DOI
16 Nelder, J. A. and Wedderburn, R. W. M., 1972, Generalized Linear Models, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A, 135(3), 370-384.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Openshaw, S. and Taylor, P. J., 1981, The modifiable areal unit problem, in Wrigley, N. and Bennett, R. J., (eds.), Quantitative geography: a British view, Routledge, London, 60-69.
18 Kim, K., Shin, J., Lee, G., and Cho, D., 2009, A location model and algorithm for visiting health-care districting for the rural elderly, Journal of the Korean Geographical Society, 44(4), 813-831 (in Korean).
19 Kim, K., 2004, Heuristic approaches for p-median location-allocation problem, Journal of Geography Education, 48, 14-30.
20 Kim, K., Lee, G., and Shin, J., 2010, A study on reconstructing of local administrative districts using spatial analysis and modeling, Journal of the Korean Association of Regional Geographers, 16(6), 673-688 (in Korean).
21 Brown, L. A. and Holmes, J. H., 1971, The delimitation of functional regions, nodal regions and hierarchies by functional distance approaches, Journal of Regional Science, 11(1), 57-72.   DOI
22 Guo, D., 2009, Flow Mapping and Multivariate Visualization of Large Spatial Interaction Data, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 15(6), 1041-1048.   DOI
23 Chun, Y., 2008, Modeling network autocorrelation within migration flows by eigenvector spatial filtering, Journal of Geographical Systems, 10(4), 317-344.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Flowerdew, R. and Aitkin, M., 1982, A Method of Fitting the Gravity Model Based on the Poisson Distribution, Journal of Regional Science, 22(2), 191-202.   DOI
25 Fotheringham, A. S. and O'Kelly, M. E., 1989, Spatial Interaction Models: Formulations and Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
26 Hirst, M. A., 1977, Hierarchical aggregation procedures for interaction data: a comment, Environment and Planning A, 9(1), 99-103.   DOI
27 Barras, R., Broadbent, T. A., Cordy-Haynes, M., Massey, D. B., Robinson, K., and Willis, J., 1971, An operational urban development model for Cheshire, Environment and Planning A, 3(2),115-234.   DOI
28 Batty M. and Sikdar, P. K., 1982c, Spatial aggregation in gravity models: 3. Two-dimensional trip distribution and location models, Environment and Planning A, 14(5), 629-658.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Batty M. and Sikdar, P. K., 1982a, Spatial aggregation in gravity models. 1. An information-theoretic framework, Environment and Planning A, 14(3), 377-405.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Batty M. and Sikdar, P. K., 1982b, Spatial aggregation in gravity models: 2. One-dimensional population density models, Environment and Planning A, 14(4), 525-553.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Batty M. and Sikdar, P.K., 1982d, Spatial aggregation in gravity models: 4. Generalisations and largescale applications, Environment and Planning A, 14(6), 795-822.   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Amrhein C. G. and Flowerdew R., 1992, The effect of data aggregation on a Poisson regression-model of Canadian migration, Environment and Planning A, 24(10), 1381-1391.   DOI
33 Alvanides, S., Openshaw, S., and Duke-Williams, O., 2000, Designing zoning systems for flow data, in Atkinson, P. and Martin, D., (eds.), GIS and Geocomputation. Innovation in GIS 7, Taylor and Francis, London, 115-134.