At COMPARE.EDU.VN, we understand the need to effectively compare frequencies across various datasets and scenarios. This guide provides a comprehensive overview of How To Compare Frequencies using statistical methods, ensuring you can draw meaningful conclusions. Learn effective frequency comparison techniques and enhance your data analysis skills today. Explore tools for frequency analysis, statistical comparison, and data interpretation with confidence.
1. Introduction to Frequency Comparison
Comparing frequencies is a fundamental task in many fields, from scientific research to market analysis. It involves assessing whether observed frequencies differ significantly from expected frequencies or from each other. Several statistical tests can be used for this purpose, each with its assumptions and applications. Understanding how to compare frequencies is essential for making informed decisions based on data. This article will guide you through the most common methods and their practical implementations.
2. Understanding Frequencies
Before delving into the methods for comparing frequencies, it’s important to understand what frequencies represent and how they are typically presented.
2.1. What are Frequencies?
Frequency refers to the number of times a particular value or event occurs within a dataset. Frequencies can be expressed as raw counts, proportions, or percentages. The choice of representation depends on the context and the specific question being addressed.
2.2. Frequency Tables
Frequency tables are a common way to summarize categorical data. They list each unique value along with its frequency. These tables are essential for visualizing and understanding the distribution of data, and they form the basis for many frequency comparison techniques.
For example, consider a survey asking respondents to choose one of four options (A, B, C, D). A frequency table might look like this:
| Option | Frequency |
|---|---|
| A | 50 |
| B | 75 |
| C | 30 |
| D | 45 |
2.3. Visualizing Frequencies
Visual representations of frequencies, such as bar charts and pie charts, can provide additional insights. Bar charts are useful for comparing frequencies across categories, while pie charts show the proportion of each category relative to the whole.
3. Chi-Square Test for Single Factor Classification
The Chi-square ((chi^2)) test is a statistical test used to determine if there is a significant association between two categorical variables. It’s particularly useful for comparing observed frequencies with expected frequencies. Let’s dive into how Chi-square test is used for single factor classification.
3.1. The Basics of the Chi-Square Test
The Chi-square test evaluates whether the observed frequencies from a sample are consistent with a defined set of expected frequencies. The formula for the Chi-square statistic is:
[
chi^2 = sum{frac{(O_i – E_i)^2}{E_i}}
]
Where:
- (O_i) is the observed frequency for category (i).
- (E_i) is the expected frequency for category (i).
3.2. Assumptions of the Chi-Square Test
Several assumptions must be met for the Chi-square test to be valid:
- Independence: Observations must be independent of each other.
- Expected Frequencies: None of the expected frequencies should be less than 5. If this assumption is violated, Yate’s correction or Fisher’s exact test may be more appropriate.
- Random Sampling: Data should be obtained via random sampling.
- Categorical Data: Data must be categorical.
3.3. Example: Testing Equal Chance of Selection
3.3.1. Problem Statement
Suppose a survey of 200 individuals is conducted, where respondents are asked to select one of five answers. We want to determine if all answers have an equal chance of being chosen. Under the null hypothesis, each answer should be selected approximately one-fifth of the time. Thus, we expect each answer to be selected about 40 times. The observed and expected values are summarized in the following frequency table:
| Answer | Observed Frequency | Expected Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 36 | 40 |
| 2 | 44 | 40 |
| 3 | 38 | 40 |
| 4 | 37 | 40 |
| 5 | 45 | 40 |
| Total | 200 | 200 |
3.3.2. Calculating the Chi-Square Statistic
Using the formula for the Chi-square statistic:
[
chi^2 = frac{(36-40)^2}{40} + frac{(44-40)^2}{40} + frac{(38-40)^2}{40} + frac{(37-40)^2}{40} + frac{(45-40)^2}{40} = 1.75
]
3.3.3. Determining the Degrees of Freedom
The degrees of freedom ((df)) for this test are calculated as the number of categories minus one. In this case, (df = 5 – 1 = 4).
3.3.4. Interpreting the Chi-Square Value
To determine the significance of our Chi-square value (1.75), we compare it to the Chi-square distribution with 4 degrees of freedom. The p-value associated with this Chi-square value is approximately 0.7816. This means that if all answers had an equal probability of being selected, there is a 78.16% chance of observing a Chi-square value as extreme as, or more extreme than, 1.75.
3.3.5. Conclusion
Since the p-value (0.7816) is greater than the typical significance level of 0.05, we fail to reject the null hypothesis. We conclude that our observed frequencies are consistent with the null hypothesis that all answers have an equal chance of being selected. Any variability can be explained by chance alone.
3.4. Implementing the Chi-Square Test in R
The Chi-square test can be easily implemented in R using the chisq.test() function.
obs <- c(36, 44, 38, 37, 45)
exp <- c(0.20, 0.20, 0.20, 0.20, 0.20)
chisq.test(obs, p=exp)The output of this function provides the Chi-square statistic, degrees of freedom, and p-value.
3.5. Understanding the Chi-Square Curve
The Chi-square curve is a probability distribution that shows the range of possible Chi-square values for a given number of degrees of freedom. The shape of the curve is determined by the degrees of freedom. To illustrate this, we can run a simulation where one of the five answers is selected at random, assuming all answers have an equal probability.
3.6. Simulation Example
Consider 999 investigators each surveying 200 individuals at random. We assume that each answer has an equal probability of being picked, and any deviations from the expected counts are due to chance variability.
n <- 999 # Number of times to collect a sample
size <- 200 # Sample size (number of respondents)
exp <- c(0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2, 0.2) # Expected fractions
chi.t <- vector(length = n) # An empty vector to store Chi-sq values
for (i in 1:n){
survey.results <- sample(c(1,2,3,4,5), size = size, replace = TRUE)
survey.sum <- table(survey.results)
chi.t[i] <- chisq.test(survey.sum, p=exp)$statistic
}
hist(chi.t, breaks=20, main="Histogram of Chi-Square Values", xlab="Chi-Square Statistic")This simulation generates 999 Chi-square values, which are then plotted using a histogram. The resulting histogram closely resembles the Chi-square curve for 4 degrees of freedom.
3.7. Can the Chi-Square Value Be ‘Too’ Good?
While a large Chi-square value can indicate a significant difference between observed and expected frequencies, a very small Chi-square value may raise questions about the validity of the data. Such a small value suggests that the observed data aligns too closely with the expected values, which may indicate bias or manipulation.
3.8. Real-World Example: Mendel’s Pea Experiment
Gregor Mendel, the father of modern genetics, conducted experiments on pea plants to understand heredity. In one experiment, he studied the color and texture of peas. He crossed pure yellow peas with pure green peas, resulting in a first generation of all yellow peas. He then cross-pollinated the first generation to produce a second generation with both green and yellow peas (approximately 25% green and 75% yellow).
Mendel also studied the texture of the peas, noting that they were either smooth or wrinkled. The second generation produced roughly 25% wrinkled peas and 75% smooth peas.
3.8.1. Observed Outcome
One of his trials produced the following outcome:
| Pea Type | Observed Number |
|---|---|
| Smooth Yellow | 315 |
| Wrinkled Yellow | 101 |
| Smooth Green | 108 |
| Wrinkled Green | 32 |
| Total | 556 |
3.8.2. Expected Outcome
Based on Mendel’s theory, we expect the following probabilities:
- Smooth Yellow: 0.75 * 0.75 = 0.5625
- Wrinkled Yellow: 0.75 * 0.25 = 0.1875
- Smooth Green: 0.25 * 0.75 = 0.1875
- Wrinkled Green: 0.25 * 0.25 = 0.0625
Using these probabilities, we can calculate the expected frequencies for each type of pea:
| Pea Type | Observed Number | Expected Number |
|---|---|---|
| Smooth Yellow | 315 | 312.75 |
| Wrinkled Yellow | 101 | 104.25 |
| Smooth Green | 108 | 104.25 |
| Wrinkled Green | 32 | 34.75 |
| Total | 556 | 556 |
3.8.3. Performing the Chi-Square Test
obs <- c(315, 101, 108, 32)
exp <- c(0.5625, 0.1875, 0.1875, 0.0625)
chisq.test(obs, p = exp)The output of this test yields a Chi-square value of approximately 0.47002, with 3 degrees of freedom and a p-value of 0.9254. This high p-value indicates that the observed data is in very good agreement with the expected values.
3.8.4. Skepticism and Interpretation
Ronald Fisher, a renowned statistician, was skeptical of Mendel’s results. The high p-value suggested that the observed data fit the expected values too well, raising the possibility of bias in Mendel’s experimental setup. While Mendel’s theory is sound and has been proven many times, the unusually good fit in this particular experiment led to questions about the methodology.
3.9. Key Takeaways
- The Chi-square test is a valuable tool for comparing observed and expected frequencies.
- It is essential to verify that the assumptions of the Chi-square test are met.
- A very small Chi-square value may indicate bias or manipulation in the data.
4. Two-Factor Classification Using Chi-Square Test
In the previous section, we examined single-factor multinomial distributions. Now, we shift our focus to two-factor analysis using the Chi-square test. How to compare frequencies in two-factor classifications is vital for understanding relationships between categorical variables.
4.1. Understanding Two-Factor Classification
In two-factor classification, we are interested in determining if there is an association between two categorical variables. This involves creating a contingency table and calculating expected frequencies based on the assumption of independence.
4.2. When to Use Fisher’s Exact Test
If both factors have only two categories (i.e., a 2×2 contingency matrix), Fisher’s exact test is often more appropriate than the Chi-square test. The workflow for Fisher’s exact test is similar, but the fisher.test() function is used instead of chisq.test().
4.3. Example: Titanic Survival Rates
4.3.1. Problem Statement
We want to investigate whether passengers and crew members of different class statuses (1st, 2nd, 3rd, and crew) were equally likely to perish in the Titanic disaster. The observed data is as follows:
| Class | Perished | Survived |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | 122 | 203 |
| 2nd | 167 | 118 |
| 3rd | 528 | 178 |
| Crew | 673 | 212 |
4.3.2. Creating a Contingency Table
The first step is to create a contingency table, which includes row sums and column sums:
| Class | Perished | Survived | Row Sums |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 122 | 203 | 325 |
| 2nd | 167 | 118 | 285 |
| 3rd | 528 | 178 | 706 |
| Crew | 673 | 212 | 885 |
| Column Sums | 1490 | 711 | Total: 2201 |
The total number of souls on the Titanic is 2201, which will be the value (n) in subsequent calculations.
4.3.3. Computing Expected Counts
Assuming all classes had an equal probability of perishing, we compute the expected counts using the formula:
[
E(n_{ij}) = frac{r_i cdot c_j}{n}
]
Where:
- (E(n_{ij})) is the expected count for the cell in row (i) and column (j).
- (r_i) is the row sum for row (i).
- (c_j) is the column sum for column (j).
- (n) is the total number of observations (2201).
For example, the expected count for 1st class passengers who perished is:
[
E(n_{11}) = frac{(325)(1490)}{2201} approx 220
]
Similarly, the expected count for 1st class passengers who survived is:
[
E(n_{12}) = frac{(325)(711)}{2201} approx 105
]
Repeating this process for all cells, we obtain the following expected table:
| Class | Perished | Survived |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | 220 | 105 |
| 2nd | 193 | 92 |
| 3rd | 478 | 228 |
| Crew | 599 | 286 |
4.3.4. Calculating the Chi-Square Statistic
The next step is to compute the Chi-square statistic between the observed and expected values:
[
chi^2 = sum{frac{(O{ij} – E{ij})^2}{E_{ij}}}
]
[
chi^2 = frac{(122 – 220)^2}{220} + frac{(203 – 105)^2}{105} + ldots + frac{(212 – 286)^2}{286} approx 190.4
]
4.3.5. Determining Degrees of Freedom
For a two-factor analysis, the degrees of freedom ((df)) are calculated as:
[
df = (rows – 1)(columns – 1)
]
In our example, (df = (4 – 1)(2 – 1) = 3).
4.3.6. Interpreting the Chi-Square Value
Our observed Chi-square value (190.4) falls far to the right on the Chi-square distribution with 3 degrees of freedom. The probability of obtaining such an extreme value is nearly 0, indicating a significant association between class status and survival rates.
4.3.7. Conclusion
The observed discrepancy in survival rates between different classes and crew members is unlikely due to chance. Class status had a significant impact on the likelihood of survival.
4.4. Implementing the Chi-Square Test in R
The Chi-square test can be easily computed in R. First, create a data frame to store the counts:
dat <- data.frame(
Perished = c(122, 167, 528, 673),
Survived = c(203, 118, 178, 212),
row.names = c("1st", "2nd", "3rd", "Crew")
)
datNow, perform the Chi-square test:
chisq.test(dat)The output provides the Chi-square statistic, degrees of freedom, and p-value.
4.5. Extracting Expected Values
To view the expected count table and additional contingency table data, store the output of the chisq.test() function to a variable:
chi.t <- chisq.test(dat)
chi.t$expected4.6. Visualizing Frequencies with Mosaic Plots
The mosaicplot() function can visualize the frequencies between observed and expected values:
par(mfrow=c(1,2), "mar"=c(1,1,3,1))
mosaicplot(chi.t$observed, cex.axis = 1 , main = "Observed counts")
mosaicplot(chi.t$expected, cex.axis = 1 , main = "Expected countsn(if class had no influence)")
par(OP)These plots help to visually compare the observed and expected counts, highlighting any significant differences.
4.7. Key Takeaways
- The Chi-square test is effective for analyzing the relationship between two categorical variables.
- Contingency tables are essential for organizing and summarizing the data.
- Expected frequencies are calculated based on the assumption of independence.
5. Three or More Factor Classification Using Loglinear Models
When data is broken down across three or more factors, we need to use a loglinear model to effectively compare frequencies. This approach extends the principles of the Chi-square test to more complex scenarios.
5.1. Introduction to Loglinear Models
Loglinear models are used to analyze the relationships between three or more categorical variables. These models are particularly useful when examining complex interactions and dependencies within the data.
5.2. Data Representation
Three-factor tables can be challenging to tabulate. Data can be stored in a long format table or as an n-dimensional table. R has a built-in dataset called Titanic that breaks down the survival/perish count across four dimensions/factors (Class, Sex, Age, and Survived).
5.3. Example: Analyzing the Titanic Dataset
The Titanic dataset is stored as a table and can be displayed as follows:
TitanicThe ftable function can be used to generate a more attractive output:
ftable(Titanic)5.4. Extracting Dimensions and Dimension Names
The number of dimensions can be extracted using the dim function:
dim(Titanic)The names of the dimensions and their factors can be extracted using the dimnames function:
dimnames(Titanic)5.5. Converting Data Formats
An n-dimensional table can be converted to an R data frame using the as.data.frame function:
as.data.frame(Titanic)Conversely, data in a dataframe format can be converted to an n-dimensional table using the xtabs() function:
xtabs(Freq ~ Class+Survived+Age+Sex , as.data.frame(Titanic))5.6. Loglinear Models and Linear Regression
Pearson’s Chi-square test can be expressed as a linear regression model where each dimension level is coded as a dummy variable. Since we are using categorical data, we apply a log transformation to the values, hence the term “loglinear model.”
5.7. Model Equation
For example, using the two-category table from the previous section, we can express the relationship between variables and counts as follows:
[
ln(count) = b_0 + color{blue}{b_1Class2 + b_2Class3 + b_3Crew + b_4Survived} + \
color{red}{b_5Class2 times Survived + b_6Class3 times Survived + b_7Crew times Survived} + ln(error)
]
Where each variable can take on one of two values: 0 (no) or 1 (yes). The terms highlighted in blue are the main effects, and the variables highlighted in red are the interactive terms.
5.8. Saturated vs. Parsimonious Models
The model described above is referred to as a saturated model because it has all the terms needed to reproduce the observed counts exactly. Our goal is to find the most parsimonious loglinear model (i.e., the one with the fewest terms possible) that can still faithfully recreate the counts.
5.9. Example: Analyzing the Titanic Dataset with Loglinear Models
5.9.1. Creating a Data Matrix
We will first create a data matrix from the Titanic dataset:
Tit1 <- apply(Titanic, c(1, 4), sum)The apply function aggregates the counts of passengers by Class (first attribute in the table Titanic) and by Survived (fourth attribute in the table).
5.9.2. Creating a Saturated Model
library(MASS)
M <- loglm( ~ Class * Survived, dat=Tit1, fit=TRUE)The model is defined by the expression ~ Class * Survived. The multiplier * indicates that both main effects and interactive effects are included.
5.9.3. Examining the Model Output
The output of the saturated model should show a Pearson Chi-square (P) value of 1, indicating that there is no difference between the model output and the observed counts.
5.9.4. Modifying the Model
We modify the model to see if the interactive term contributes significantly to the model’s ability to predict the true observed counts. We omit the interactive term Class:Survived using the update() function:
M2 <- update( M, ~ . - Class:Survived)The syntax ~ . tells R to use the last model, and the syntax - Class:Survived tells R to omit this variable from the model.
5.9.5. Interpreting the Modified Model Output
The output of the modified model provides the Pearson Chi-square value and associated (P) value. A significant (P) value indicates that the interactive term contributes significantly to the model’s ability to predict the observed counts.
5.9.6. Extracting Predicted Values
To see the predicted values, type the following:
M2$fittedThese are the same expected values as those computed in the two-factor analysis section.
5.10. Analyzing a More Complex Table
Let’s test for independence on a more complex table with three categories (Class, Survived, and Sex):
Tit2 <- apply(Titanic, c(1,2,4), sum)
ftable(Tit2)Now, generate our saturated model to ensure that we can reproduce the observed counts exactly:
library(MASS)
M <- loglm( ~ Class * Survived * Sex, dat=Tit2, fit=TRUE)5.10.1. Removing Interaction Terms
Because we now have three categories, we have three interaction terms: two two-way terms (Class:Survived and Class:Sex), and one three-way term (Class:Survived:Sex). We will first remove the three-way interaction term:
M2 <- update( M, ~ . - Class:Survived:Sex)Checking the model output indicates that without the three-way interaction term, the model does a poor job in predicting our observed counts.
5.10.2. Comparing Models
Before reporting the results, it is a good idea to compare the saturated model with the model M2 using the anova() function:
anova(M, M2)The anova() function computes the difference in likelihoods for the two models.
5.11. Key Takeaways
- Loglinear models are essential for analyzing the relationships between three or more categorical variables.
- The goal is to find the most parsimonious model that can faithfully reproduce the observed counts.
- The
anova()function can be used to compare different models and determine the significance of interaction terms.
6. Inferences About Population Variance
The Chi-square test can also be used to estimate uncertainty in our estimate of the population variance. This application is useful when you want to make inferences about a population mean using confidence intervals.
6.1. Assumptions for Variance Inference
An important assumption that must be met here is that the population follows a normal (Gaussian) curve. If this assumption cannot be made, alternate (non-parametric) methods should be used.
6.2. Chi-Square Formula for Variance
The Chi-square statistic is computed as follows:
[
chi^2 = frac{(n-1)s^2}{sigma^2}
]
Where:
- (n-1) is the degrees of freedom.
- (s^2) is the sample’s variance (the square of the standard deviation, (s)).
- (sigma^2) is the population variance.
6.3. Computing Confidence Intervals for Variances
6.3.1. Example
If a sample of size 100 has a standard deviation, (s), of 10.95. What is the standard deviation’s confidence interval for an (alpha) of 0.05?
6.3.2. Solution
To compute the Chi-square statistics that will define the confidence interval, (CI), we need to identify the probabilities ((P)-values) that define the ‘rejection’ regions of the Chi-square curve. Given that we can compute the degrees of freedom (100 – 1 = 99) and that we are given an (alpha) value of 0.05, we can draw the Chi-square curve and identify the ‘rejection’ regions. This problem can be treated as a two-tailed test with a lower (P) value of (0.05/2 = 0.025) and an upper (P) value of (1 – 0.05/2 = 0.975).
The two Chi-square values that define the interval can now be computed using the qchisq() function.
qchisq(p = 0.025, df = 99)qchisq(p = 0.975, df = 99)Now that we have our Chi-square values, we can find the (sigma^2) values (and by extension, the standard deviation (sigma)) that define the (CI). We simply solve the Chi-square equation for (sigma^2):
[
sigma^2 = frac{(n-1)s^2}{chi^2}
]
The confidence interval (CI) for the population variance is thus:
[
frac{(n-1)s^2}{chi{0.975}^2} < sigma^2 < frac{(n-1)s^2}{chi{0.025}^2}
]
[
frac{(99)10.95^2}{128.422} < sigma^2 < frac{(99)10.95^2}{73.36108}
]
[
92.4 < sigma^2 < 161.8
]
And the confidence interval for the population standard deviation, (sigma), is:
[
sqrt{92.4} < sigma < sqrt{161.8}
]
[
9.6 < sigma < 12.72
]
6.4. Testing Hypotheses on Population Variances
6.4.1. Example
A machine shop is manufacturing a part whose width must be 19”. The customer requires that the width have a standard deviation no greater than 2.0 (mu m) with a confidence of 95%. 15 parts are sampled at random, and their widths are measured. The sample standard deviation, (s), is 1.7 (mu m). Is the standard deviation for all the parts, (sigma), less than 2.0?
6.4.2. Solution
The question asks that we test the null hypothesis, (H_o), that the standard deviation from the population, (sigma_o), is less than (2.0). The sample standard deviation, (s), is 1.7. Since we will be using the Chi-square test, we will need to work with variances and not standard deviations, so (H_o) must be stated in terms of (sigma_o^2) and not (sigma_o). Our test statistic is therefore computed as follows:
[
chi^2 = frac{(n-1)s^2}{sigma_o^2} = frac{(15-1)1.7^2}{2.0^2} = 10.1
]
The probability of getting a Chi-square of 10.1 is 0.246. Since the customer wants to be 95% confident that the difference between our observed (s) and the threshold (sigma_o) of 2.0 is real, this translates to having an observed (P) closer to the left tail of the distribution. Our observed (P) value of 0.246 is greater than the desired (alpha) value of 0.05, meaning that there is a good chance that our observed difference in width variance is due to chance variability. We, therefore, cannot reject the null and must inform the customer that the machined parts do not meet the desired criteria.
The test can easily be implemented in R as follows:
chi.t <- (15 - 1) * 1.7^2 / 2.0^2
pchisq(chi.t, 15-1)where the pchisq() function returns the probability for our observed Chi-square value with a (df) of ((15-1)).
6.5. Key Takeaways
- The Chi-square test can be used to estimate uncertainty in the population variance.
- It is essential to ensure that the population follows a normal (Gaussian) curve.
- Confidence intervals and hypothesis tests can be conducted to make inferences about the population variance.
7. Additional Methods for Comparing Frequencies
While the Chi-square test is a versatile tool, other methods may be more appropriate depending on the data and research question.
7.1. Fisher’s Exact Test
Fisher’s exact test is used when dealing with small sample sizes or when the assumptions of the Chi-square test are not met. It is particularly useful for 2×2 contingency tables.
7.2. G-Test
The G-test (also known as the likelihood ratio test) is another alternative to the Chi-square test. It is often preferred when dealing with small sample sizes or complex experimental designs.
7.3. Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is used to compare the cumulative distribution functions of two samples. It is suitable for comparing frequencies when the data is continuous or ordinal.
8. Conclusion
Understanding how to compare frequencies is essential for data analysis and decision-making. By mastering the methods outlined in this guide, including the Chi-square test, loglinear models, and other relevant techniques, you can effectively analyze data, draw meaningful conclusions, and make informed decisions. Remember to carefully consider the assumptions of each test and choose the method that is most appropriate for your specific research question. For more comprehensive guides and tools to aid your data analysis, visit COMPARE.EDU.VN today.
9. Call to Action
Are you struggling to compare different products, services, or ideas? Visit COMPARE.EDU.VN to find detailed and objective comparisons that will help you make informed decisions. Our comprehensive analyses provide you with the information you need to choose the best option for your needs.
Address: 333 Comparison Plaza, Choice City, CA 90210, United States
Whatsapp: +1 (626) 555-9090
Website: compare.edu.vn
10. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
1. What is frequency comparison?
Frequency comparison involves assessing whether observed frequencies differ significantly from expected frequencies or from each other.
2. Why is frequency comparison important?
It helps in understanding patterns, relationships, and differences within datasets, leading to informed decisions.
3. What is the Chi-square test used for?
The Chi-square test is used to determine if there is a significant association between two categorical variables by comparing observed and expected frequencies.
4. What are the assumptions of the Chi-square test?
The assumptions include independence of observations, expected frequencies greater than 5, random sampling, and categorical data.
5. When should Fisher’s exact test be used instead of the Chi-square test?
Fisher’s exact test is more appropriate for small sample sizes or when the assumptions of the Chi-square test are not met, especially in 2×2 contingency tables.
6. What are loglinear models used for?
Loglinear models are used to analyze relationships between three or more categorical variables, examining complex interactions and dependencies within the data.
7. How is the degrees of freedom calculated for a two-factor Chi-square test?
The degrees of freedom are calculated as (
