Advertisement

Fisher’s Contributions to the Analysis of Categorical Data

  • Stephen E. Fienberg
Part of the Lecture Notes in Statistics book series (LNS, volume 1)

Abstract

Those who have had only the briefest of introduction to the analysis of categorical data will have learned of Fisher’s contributions such as his exact test. But Fisher’s work in this area covered a variety of topics, including fundamental papers on the distribution of the chi-square statistic which brought him into a major confrontation with Karl Pearson.

Keywords

Loglinear Model Binomial Variate Covariance Matrix Inverse Exact Test Statistic Categorical Data Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartlett, M.S. (1935). “Contingency Table Interactions,” Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 2, 248–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkson, J. (1978). “In Dispraise of the Exact Test,” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 2, 27–42.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fienberg, S.E. (1979). “The Use of Chi-Squared Statistics for Categorical Data Problems,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 41, 54–64.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Greenwood, M. and G.U. Yule (1915). “The Statistics of Antityphoid and Anticholera Inoculations, and the Interpretation of Such Statistics in General,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, Section of Epidemiology and State Medicine, viii, 113.Google Scholar
  5. Kempthorne, O. (1979). “In Dispraise of the Exact Test: Reactions,” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 3, 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Larntz, K. (1978). “Small-Sample Comparisons of Exact Levels for Chi-Squared Goodness-of-Fit Statistics,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 73, 253–263.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Pearson, K. (1900). “On the Criterion that a Given System of Deviations from the Probable in the Case of a Correlated System of Variables is Such that it Can be Reasonably Supposed to have Arisen from Random Sampling,” The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 1, 157.Google Scholar
  8. Pearson, K. (1922). “Further Note on the X2 Test of Goodness of Fit,” Biometrika, 14, 418.Google Scholar
  9. Yule, G.U. (1922). “On the Application of the X2 Method to Association and Contingency Tables with Experimental Illustration,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 5, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen E. Fienberg

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations