Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T15:01:30.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing Independence in Two-Way Contingency Tables with Data Subject to Misclassification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Kwanchai Assakul and
Charles H. Proctor
Kwanchai Assakul
Affiliation:
Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
Charles H. Proctor
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The misclassification process is represented by a stochastic matrix containing the probabilities that an individual who belongs in one cell is counted as belonging to another (or perhaps the same) cell. These probabilities are supposed known. If misclassification in the row direction is independent of that along the column variable then the size of the usual chi-square test is unchanged. It is shown how to calculate loss of power in this case and also how to calculate the change in size of the test if the errors are not independent. A modified test criterion is suggested when errors are not independent and a numerical example is included.

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 1967, pp. 67 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Assakul, K. Testing hypotheses with categorical data subject to misclassification, Raleigh, N. C.: Institute of Statistics, 1965.Google Scholar
Barnard, G. A. Significance tests for 2 × 2 tables. Biometrika, 1947, 34, 248–252.Google Scholar
Bross, I. Misclassification in 2 × 2 tables. Biometrics, 1954, 10, 478–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramer, H. Mathematical methods of statistics, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1946.Google Scholar
Diamond, E. L. The limiting power of categorical data chi-square tests analogous to normal analysis of variance. Ann. Math. Stat., 1963, 34, 1432–1441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fix, E. Tables of non-centralx 2. Univ. Calif. Publication in Statistics, 1949, 1, 15–19.Google Scholar
Mitra, S. K. On the limiting power function of the frequency chi-square test. Ann. Math. Stat., 1958, 29, 1221–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mote, V. L. and Anderson, R. L. The effect of misclassification on the properties ofx 2-tests. Biometrika, 1965, 52, 95–109.Google Scholar
Neyman, J. Contributions to the theory of the x 2-tests. In the Proceedings of the Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. University of California Press, 1949.Google Scholar
Pitman, E. J. G. Notes on non-parametric statistical inference, Raleigh, N. C.: Institute of Statistics, 1948.Google Scholar
Roy, S. N. and Mitra, S. K. An introduction to some non-parametric generalizations of analysis of variance and multivariate analysis, Raleigh, N. C.: Institute of Statistics, 1955.Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of Census. Evaluation and Research Program of the U. S. Censuses of Population and Housing, 1960—Accuracy of Data on Housing Characteristics. Series ER60, No. 3, Washington, D. C., 1964.Google Scholar
U. S. Bureau of the Census. U. S. Census of Housing: 1960. Washington, D. C., 1963, VI.Google Scholar