Contingency Tables

Discussion in 'CT3' started by sfischer, Mar 12, 2013.

  1. sfischer

    sfischer Member

    In the example 12.21, we combine 2 groups because character present has a value or 3.5 and 1.9 in the 2 groups we combine (both <5). Would we combine them if only one value was <5? If we didn't combine them would the test be still valid (in this case) - I thought we were only concerned if >20% of the Ei were <5? Could we arbitrarily decide to group say 21-25 and 26-30 and the test would still be valid? Sorry 3 questions for the price of 1 there just trying to get a full understanding of when to combine and when not to.
    Thanks.
     
  2. Tim.Sullivan

    Tim.Sullivan Member

    Examples 12.18 and 12.19 seem to indicate that we should combine groups when any ei is <5. I'll be going through past papers in coming weeks - it would be good to know if anyone else has followed the 20% "conservative" approach?

    Tim
     
  3. John Lee

    John Lee ActEd Tutor Staff Member

    Apologies - I thought I had answered this question!

    You'd certainly need to combine the one which was less than 5 but you could choose which group you'd combine it with.

    There are 8 cells and two of them (ie 25%) are less than 5 so that is >20% of them.

    Yup - the test just compares numbers in the groups - doesn't matter wherre they're from.
     
  4. sfischer

    sfischer Member

    Thanks for that. 2 out of 8=25%...Ok missed the simple maths there. But on your response to the first part - eg. if I only had 1 out of the 8 <5, I would still need to combine it - where does the >20% rule come in if we need to combine all values <5 anyway?
     
  5. John Lee

    John Lee ActEd Tutor Staff Member

    There's two rules:

    the easy-to-remember-but-harsher-than-it-needs-to-be "combine if <5" rule

    the harder-to-remember-but-not-so-harsh "combine if more than 20% <5 or if any are <1" rule

    the second is more accurate - but the first is a nice easy to remember rule.

    In the exam use whichever you like.
     
  6. sfischer

    sfischer Member

    That's clear - thanks.
     

Share This Page