Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

Re: st: RE: Binomial confidence intervals (more)


From   Richard Williams <Richard.A.Williams.5@nd.edu>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: RE: Binomial confidence intervals (more)
Date   Thu, 09 Sep 2004 08:26:22 -0500

At 08:14 AM 9/9/2004 -0500, FEIVESON, ALAN H. (AL) (JSC-SK) (NASA) wrote:
All this discussion about failure of binomial confidence intervals to give
"exact" coverage also applies to the Fisher "exact" test, whose actual level
(probability of rejecting the null hypothesis of equal proportions, when in
fact the proportions are equal) is usually less than the nominal level,
depending on the true proprtions. In the frequentist setting, it's the same
problem - there are only a finite number of possible outcomes.

Al Feiveson
I was wondering about that. So, is there also a raging controversy over whether some alternative to Fisher is superior, e.g. Yates correction for continuity? Like Nick Cox said in an earlier post, it sounds like "exact" is more of a propaganda term than an accurate description of the test. (Kind of like saying you've got the "best" product on the market.)

-------------------------------------------
Richard Williams, Notre Dame Dept of Sociology
OFFICE: (574)631-6668, (574)631-6463
FAX: (574)288-4373
HOME: (574)289-5227
EMAIL: Richard.A.Williams.5@ND.Edu
WWW (personal): http://www.nd.edu/~rwilliam
WWW (department): http://www.nd.edu/~soc

*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/




© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index