Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I am measuring if a number of different parameters of two populations changed with time
    Male (24 changed, 13 did not change)
    Female (32 changed, 5 did not changed)

    Is it valid to do a Pearson Chi squared instead of an exact Fischer test to show that more parameters changed in the female than male population
    Thanks
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Gregorius
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jsmith6131)
    I am measuring if a number of different parameters of two populations changed with time
    Male (24 changed, 13 did not change)
    Female (32 changed, 5 did not changed)

    Is it valid to do a Pearson Chi squared instead of an exact Fischer test to show that more parameters changed in the female than male population
    Thanks
    Chi-Squared is better for large cell sizes, I'm pretty sure you can lose power with Fisher's Exact test.
    Some of the varying degrees of what classify as "large" are listed here.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hey, I'm doing AS geography and need to know what chi squared is. Can you remind me how it's done and maybe I could help u out with you question????
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joostan)
    Chi-Squared is better for large cell sizes, I'm pretty sure you can lose power with Fisher's Exact test.
    Some of the varying degrees of what classify as "large" are listed here.
    So can I not use Pearson Chi?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jsmith6131)
    So can I not use Pearson Chi?
    Well that depends on how you define a "large sample size" and an "adequate cell size".
    The link I posted suggested around 5 or more in each cell is sufficient for a 2x2 table.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joostan)
    Well that depends on how you define a "large sample size" and an "adequate cell size".
    The link I posted suggested around 5 or more in each cell is sufficient for a 2x2 table.
    Ye, I have an expected count of 9.0 as the minimum. THe other expected counts are larger.
    So this means it is a valid test then, right?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jsmith6131)
    Ye, I have an expected count of 9.0 as the minimum. THe other expected counts are larger.
    So this means it is a valid test then, right?
    I'd go for it based on what I've read, though I'm not an expert on the matter by any stretch of the imagination.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jsmith6131)
    I am measuring if a number of different parameters of two populations changed with time
    Male (24 changed, 13 did not change)
    Female (32 changed, 5 did not changed)

    Is it valid to do a Pearson Chi squared instead of an exact Fischer test to show that more parameters changed in the female than male population
    Thanks
    The short answer is that it is preferable to do a chi-squared test (with continuity correction) (or the equivalent test-of-proportions). In fact, whichever way you do it, you'll end up with a p-value hovering around the "magic" 0.05 mark - so your conclusion will be that there is only weak evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no difference.

    Here's a longer answer. The numbers that you have presented suggest that the experimental design involved selecting 37 men and 37 women from some underlying population and then measuring some fact about them. The question of interest is whether the proportion of men where the fact is true is different from the proportion of women where the fact is true. That is, the experimental design points towards using a test for the difference of proportions. It turns out that the standard test for difference of proportions is equivalent to a chi-squared test (with continuity correction).

    If you stick the data in a 2x2 table, you have the situation where the column totals are fixed at 37 for both women and men. This is not the only way in which a 2x2 contingency table can arise. There are experimental designs that lead to 2x2 tables with fixed rows (and not fixed columns), fixed rows and fixed columns, and neither fixed rows nor fixed columns, but fixed overall total. Each of these situations (strictly speaking) has its own statistical test. It just so happens that chi-squared approximates them all pretty well!

    The situation in which Fisher's exact test is valid is where both the row totals and the column totals are fixed by experimental design (google the lady tasting tea for the paradigmatic example). In this case, the 2x2 table is exactly specified by the value of a single one of the entries and that distribution is known exactly (it's a hypergeometric distribution) - hence the name of the test. So here, the FET is not really appropriate, although the answers it will give will approximate the chi-squared answer.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gregorius)
    The short answer is that it is preferable to do a chi-squared test (with continuity correction) (or the equivalent test-of-proportions). In fact, whichever way you do it, you'll end up with a p-value hovering around the "magic" 0.05 mark - so your conclusion will be that there is only weak evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no difference.

    Here's a longer answer. The numbers that you have presented suggest that the experimental design involved selecting 37 men and 37 women from some underlying population and then measuring some fact about them. The question of interest is whether the proportion of men where the fact is true is different from the proportion of women where the fact is true. That is, the experimental design points towards using a test for the difference of proportions. It turns out that the standard test for difference of proportions is equivalent to a chi-squared test (with continuity correction).

    If you stick the data in a 2x2 table, you have the situation where the column totals are fixed at 37 for both women and men. This is not the only way in which a 2x2 contingency table can arise. There are experimental designs that lead to 2x2 tables with fixed rows (and not fixed columns), fixed rows and fixed columns, and neither fixed rows nor fixed columns, but fixed overall total. Each of these situations (strictly speaking) has its own statistical test. It just so happens that chi-squared approximates them all pretty well!

    The situation in which Fisher's exact test is valid is where both the row totals and the column totals are fixed by experimental design (google the lady tasting tea for the paradigmatic example). In this case, the 2x2 table is exactly specified by the value of a single one of the entries and that distribution is known exactly (it's a hypergeometric distribution) - hence the name of the test. So here, the FET is not really appropriate, although the answers it will give will approximate the chi-squared answer.
    THanks very much for your help
    Really appreciate it!!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Make your revision easier

    Maths

    Maths Forum posting guidelines

    Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

    Equations

    How to use LaTex

    Writing equations the easy way

    Student revising

    Study habits of A* students

    Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

    Study Planner

    Create your own Study Planner

    Never miss a deadline again

    Polling station sign

    Thinking about a maths degree?

    Chat with other maths applicants

    Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.