Statalist


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: RE: [iso-8859-1] Fisher´s exact test for rxc [2X2] tables: one-tailed or two-tailed[iso-8859-1] [iso-8859-1] ?


From   "Tiago V. Pereira" <tiago.pereira@incor.usp.br>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: RE: [iso-8859-1] Fisher´s exact test for rxc [2X2] tables: one-tailed or two-tailed[iso-8859-1] [iso-8859-1] ?
Date   Sat, 2 May 2009 14:32:18 -0300 (BRT)

Many thanks, Steve!

But now I am a bit more confused. For example, the Stata exact test for
rxc tables considers any possible table combination in which the statistic
is equal or more extreme than that observed by the actual data. However,
this embraces tables that go in the contrary direction to the observed
data as well. In other words, the test considers any departure that is
higher than the observed one. So, this is not a two-sided hypothesis, even
though the distribution is one-sided?

All the best,

Tiago


> I'm going to retract my previous statement and agree with the Stata
> manual that the chi square and exact RxC tests for independence
> reported in Stata are properly called  one-sided.
>
>  I'll again use the analogy of the chi square Test, because I believe
> that at least one version of the exact test ranks tables on the value
> of their chi square statistic.  The chi square test is a test of fit
> of the model of independence, and rejects if the chi square statistic
> is "too big". Call this a "right-tail" test. The implicit parameter
> here is the sum of squares in which counts are replaced by
> probabilities.
>
> However one can conceive of a test of  independence, in which the
> alternative is 'too good a fit".  For example, RA Fisher believed that
> some of Gregory Mendel's observations were too close to expectation to
> have occurred by chance.  (For a revisionist view see: CE Novitski
> (2004) Revision of Fisher's Analysis of Mendel's Garden Pea
> Experiments. Genetics 166: 1139-1140
> http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/full/166/3/1139 ).
>
> If one conducted a test with this alternative, it would reject if the
> Chi Square statistic is "too small".  The analogous exact test would
> do the same.  This would be a "left-tail" test.
>
> The chi square and exact tests for independence reported by Stata are
> indeed  the right-tail tests  and so are "one-sided".
>
> I apologize to Tiago for  my misleading comments.
>
> -Steve
>
>  On Behalf Of Tiago V. Pereira
>>> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 5:39 AM
>>> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>>> Subject: st: [iso-8859-1] Fisher´s exact test for rxc tables:
>>> one-tailed or
>>> two-ta iled[iso-8859-1] ?
>>>
>>> Just would like to thank David, Richard  and Steve for their comments
>>> on
>>> my last query. The two-sided option seems more plausible, indeed.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>> Tiago
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>> Dear statalisters,
>>>
>>> I was reading some old post regarding exact tests in Stata and have
>>> found
>>> the following message:
>>>
>>> http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2005-06/msg00029.html
>>>
>>> The author of this note comments on the possibility of the Fisher´s
>>> exact
>>> test for rxc tables available in Stata to be one-tailed. Hence, is it
>>> two-
>>> or one-tailed?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Tiago
>>>
>






*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   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