On 2 Mar 2001 07:27:16 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Esa M. Rantanen)
wrote:
[ snip, detail ]
> contingency table. I have used a Chi-Sq. analysis to determine if there is
> a statisitcally significant difference between the (treatment) groups (all
> 4!), and indeed there is. I assume, however, that I cannot simply do
> pairwise comparisons between the groups using Chi-Sq. and 2 x 2 matrices
> without inflating the probability of Type 1 error, (1-alpha)^4 in this
> case. As far as I know, there are no equivalents to Duncan's or Tukey's
> tests for the type of data (binary) I have to deal with.
Well, if you want to do the ANOVA on the dichotomous variable,
I won't complain. My reaction is, you are assuming that, somewhere,
great precision matters. But being precise in your thinking will gain
you most, so that you do and report just ONE important test, that you
figured out beforehand, instead of trying to cope with 6 tests that
happen to fall into your lap.
I would probably
(a) Let the Overall test justify all my followup testing, where the
followup testing is descriptive, among categories of equal N and
equivalent importance; or
(b) Do a few specified tests with Bonferroni correction, and report
those tests.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
