IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/amstat/v74y2020i2p116-124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relative Performance Index: Neutralizing Simpson's Paradox

Author

Listed:
  • Ernest C. Davenport,
  • Kyle Nickodem
  • Mark L. Davison
  • Gareth Phillips
  • Edmund Graham

Abstract

Comparing populations on one or more variables is often of interest. These comparisons are typically made using the mean; however, it is well known that mean comparisons can lead to misinterpretation because of Simpson's paradox. Simpson's paradox occurs when there is a differential distribution of subpopulations across the populations being compared and the means of those subpopulations are different. This article develops the relative performance index (RPI) to ameliorate effects of Simpson's paradox. Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) are used to illustrate use of the new index. The utility of RPI is compared to the population mean and a prior index, the balanced index. This article shows how RPI can be generalized to a variety of contexts with implications for decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernest C. Davenport, & Kyle Nickodem & Mark L. Davison & Gareth Phillips & Edmund Graham, 2020. "The Relative Performance Index: Neutralizing Simpson's Paradox," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(2), pages 116-124, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:74:y:2020:i:2:p:116-124
    DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2018.1451777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2018.1451777
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00031305.2018.1451777?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:amstat:v:74:y:2020:i:2:p:116-124. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTAS20 .

    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.