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

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

From   Marcello Pagano <>
Subject   Re: st: RE: Binomial confidence intervals (more)
Date   Thu, 09 Sep 2004 10:15:36 -0400

That is exactly right.


Richard Williams wrote:

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):
WWW (department):

* For searches and help try:


Marcello Pagano Biostatistics Department Tel: 1-617-432-4911
Harvard School of Public Health Fax: 1-617-739-1781 655 Huntington Avenue
Boston, MA 02115

eppur si muove

* For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2021 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index