IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0199102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A discussion on significance indices for contingency tables under small sample sizes

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia L Oliveira
  • Carlos A de B Pereira
  • Marcio A Diniz
  • Adriano Polpo

Abstract

Hypothesis testing in contingency tables is usually based on asymptotic results, thereby restricting its proper use to large samples. To study these tests in small samples, we consider the likelihood ratio test (LRT) and define an accurate index for the celebrated hypotheses of homogeneity, independence, and Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The aim is to understand the use of the asymptotic results of the frequentist Likelihood Ratio Test and the Bayesian FBST (Full Bayesian Significance Test) under small-sample scenarios. The proposed exact LRT p-value is used as a benchmark to understand the other indices. We perform analysis in different scenarios, considering different sample sizes and different table dimensions. The conditional Fisher’s exact test for 2 × 2 tables and the Barnard’s exact test are also discussed. The main message of this paper is that all indices have very similar behavior, except for Fisher and Barnard tests that has a discrete behavior. The most powerful test was the asymptotic p-value from the likelihood ratio test, suggesting that is a good alternative for small sample sizes.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia L Oliveira & Carlos A de B Pereira & Marcio A Diniz & Adriano Polpo, 2018. "A discussion on significance indices for contingency tables under small sample sizes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0199102
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199102
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0199102&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0199102?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0199102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.