Statistical Science

The $2\times2$ table: a discussion from a Bayesian viewpoint

J. V. Howard

Full-text: Open access

Abstract

The $2\times2$ table is used as a vehicle for discussing different approaches to statistical inference. Several of these approaches (both classical and Bayesian) are compared, and difficulties with them are highlighted. More frequent use of one-sided tests is advocated. Given independent samples from two binomial distributions, and taking independent Jeffreys priors, we note that the posterior probability that the proportion of successes in the first population is larger than in the second can be estimated from the standard (uncorrected) chi-square significance level. An exact formula for this probability is derived. However, we argue that usually it will be more appropriate to use dependent priors, and we suggest a particular "standard prior" for the $2\times2$ table. For small numbers of observations this is more conservative than Fisher's exact test, but it is less conservative for larger sample sizes. Several examples are given.

Article information

Source
Statist. Sci., Volume 13, Number 4 (1998), 351-367.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 9 August 2002

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1028905830

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1214/ss/1028905830

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR1705267

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1059.62526

Subjects
Primary: 62F15: Bayesian inference
Secondary: 62H17: Contingency tables

Keywords
Bayesian statistics two by two contingency tables Fisher's exact text Yates's correction chi-square tests significance tests p-values likelihood principles conditioning ancillarity dependent prior distributions posterior probability

Citation

Howard, J. V. The $2\times2$ table: a discussion from a Bayesian viewpoint. Statist. Sci. 13 (1998), no. 4, 351--367. doi:10.1214/ss/1028905830. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1028905830


Export citation

References

  • Abramowitz, M. and Stegun, I., eds. (1970). Handbook of Mathematical Functions. National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
  • Altham, P. M. E. (1969). Exact Bayesian analysis of a 2 × 2 contingency table, and Fisher's "exact" significance test. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 31 261-269.
  • Antelman, G. R. (1972). Interrelated Bernoulli processes. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 67 831-841.
  • Barnard, G. A. (1947). Significance tests for 2 × 2 tables. Biometrika 34 123-138. Bartlett, R. H., Roloff, D. W., Cornell, R. G., Andrews, A. F.,
  • Dillon, P. W. and Zwischenberger, J. B. (1985). Extracorporeal circulation in neonatal respiratory failure: a prospective randomised study. Pediatrics 76 479-487.
  • Begg, C. B. (1990). On inferences from Wei's biased coin design for clinical trials. Biometrika 77 467-484.
  • Berger, J. O., Boukai, B. and Wang, Y. (1997). Unified frequentist and Bayesian testing of a precise hy pothesis (with discussion). Statist. Sci. 12 133-160.
  • Berger, J. O. and Delampady, M. (1987). Testing precise hy potheses. Statist. Sci. 2 317-352.
  • Berkson, J. (1978). In dispraise of the exact test. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 2 27-42.
  • Church, A. (1940). On the concept of a random sequence. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 46 130-135.
  • Conover, W. J. (1974). Some reasons for not using the Yates continuity correction on 2 × 2 contingency tables (with discussion). J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 69 374-382. Cornell, R. G., Landenberger, B. D. and Bartlett, R. H.
  • (1986). Randomized play the winner clinical trials. Comm. Statist. Theory Methods 15 159-178.
  • Cornfield, J. (1956). A statistical problem arising from retrospective studies. Proc. Third Berkeley Sy mp. Math. Statist. Probab. 135-148. Univ. California Press, Berkeley.
  • Cox, D. R. and Hinkley, D. V. (1974). Theoretical Statistics. Chapman and Hall, London.
  • D'Agostino, R. B., Chase, W. and Belanger, A. (1988). The appropriateness of some common procedures for testing the equality of two independent binomial proportions. Amer. Statist. 42 198-202.
  • Dawid, A. P. (1984). Statistical theory: the prequential approach (with discussion). J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. A 147 278-292.
  • Edwards, A. W. F. (1972). Likelihood. Cambridge Univ. Press.
  • Fisher, R. A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. Oliver and Boy d, Edinburgh.
  • Fisher, R. A. (1945). A new test for 2×2 tables. Nature 156 388.
  • Franck, W. E. (1986). P-values for discrete test statistics. Biometrical J. 28 403-406.
  • Fraser, D. A. S., Monette, G. and Ng, K.-W. (1984). Marginalization, likelihood and structural models. In Multivariate Analy sis VI (P. R. Krishnaiah, ed.) 209-217. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
  • Goldstein, M. and Howard, J. V. (1991). A likelihood paradox. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 53 619-628.
  • Grizzle, J. E. (1967). Continuity correction in the 2-test for 2 × 2 tables. Amer. Statist. 21 28-32.
  • Haber, M. (1986). A modified exact test for 2 × 2 contingency tables. Biometrical J. 28 455-463.
  • Jeffrey s, H. (1961). Theory of Probability, 3rd ed. Oxford Univ. Press.
  • Kass, R. E. and Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bay es factors. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 90 773-795.
  • Lancaster, H. O. (1961). Significance tests in discrete distributions. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 56 233-234.
  • Lane, D. A. and Sudderth, W. D. (1983). Coherent and continuous inference. Ann. Statist. 11 114-120.
  • Lehmann, E. L. (1986). Testing Statistical Hy potheses, 2nd ed. Wiley, New York.
  • Little, R. J. A. (1989). Testing the equality of two independent binomial proportions. Amer. Statist. 43 283-288.
  • Pearson, E. S. (1947). The choice of statistical tests illustrated on the interpretation of data classed in a 2 × 2 table. Biometrika 34 139-167.
  • Pearson, K. (1900). On the criterion that a given sy stem of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated sy stem of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Phil. Mag. 5(50) 157-175.
  • Pratt, J. W. (1965). Bayesian interpretation of standard inference statements (with discussion). J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 27 169-203.
  • Robbins, H. (1977). A fundamental question of practical statistics. Letter to the editor. Amer. Statist. 31 97.
  • Routledge, R. D. (1992). Resolving the conflict over Fisher's exact test. Canad. J. Statist. 20 201-209.
  • Stone, M. (1969). The role of significance testing: some data with a message. Biometrika 56 485-493.
  • Suissa, S. and Shuster, J. J. (1985). Exact unconditional sample sizes for the 2 × 2 binomial trial. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. A 148 317-327.
  • Tocher, K. D. (1950). Extension of Ney man-Pearson theory of tests to discontinuous variates. Biometrika 37 130-144.
  • Upton, G. J. G. (1992). Fisher's exact test. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. A 155 395-402.
  • Wei, L. J. (1988). Exact two-sample permutation tests based on the randomized play-the-winner rule. Biometrika 75 603- 606.
  • Wei, L. J. and Durham, S. (1978). The randomized play-thewinner rule in medical trials. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 73 830- 843.
  • Yates, F. (1984). Tests of significance for 2×2 contingency tables (with discussion). J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. A 147 426-463.