Measures of Association for Cross Classifications III: Approximate Sampling Theory

  • Leo A. Goodman
  • William H. Kruskal
Part of the Springer Series in Statistics book series (SSS)


The population measures of association for cross classifications, discussed in the authors’ prior publications, have sample analogues that are approximately normally distributed for large samples. (Some qualifications and restrictions are necessary.) These large sample normal distributions with their associated standard errors, are derived for various measures of association and various methods of sampling. It is explained how the large sample normality may be used to test hypotheses about the measures and about differences between them, and to construct corresponding confidence intervals. Numerical results are given about the adequacy of the large sample normal approximations. In order to facilitate extension of the large sample results to other measures of association, and to other modes of sampling, than those treated here, the basic manipulative tools of large sample theory are explained and illustrated.


Maximum Likelihood Estimator Asymptotic Distribution Asymptotic Approximation Asymptotic Variance Multivariate Normal Distribution 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Bulmer, M. G., “Confidence intervals for distance in the analysis of variance,” Biometrika, 45 (1958), 360–9.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Cramér, Harald, Mathematical Methods of Statistics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1946.MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Daniels, H. E., and Kendall, M. G., “The significance of rank correlations where parental correlation exists,” Biometrika, 34 (1947), 198–208.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Daniels, H. E., “Rank correlations and population models,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 12 (1950), 171–81.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    El-Bradry, M. A., and Stephan, F. F., “On adjusting sample tabulations to census counts,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50 (1955), 738–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Friedlander, D., “A technique for estimating a contingency table, given the marginal totals and some supplementary data,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 124 (1961), 412–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Goodman, Leo A., “On methods for comparing contingency tables,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 126 (1963), 94–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Goodman, Leo A., and Kruskal, William H., “Measures of association for cross classifications,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49 (1954), 732–64.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Goodman, Leo A., and Kruskal, William H., “Measures of association for cross classifications. II: Further discussion and references,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 54 (1959), 123–63.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Greenwood, Robert E., and Glasgow, Mark O., “Distribution of maximum and minimum frequencies in a sample drawn from a multinomial distribution,” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 21 (1950), 416–24.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hoeffding (Höffding), Wassily, “On the distribution of the rank correlation coefficient τ when the variates are not independent,” Biometrika, 34 (1947), 183–96.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Hoeffding, Wassily, “A class of statistics with asymptotically normal distribution,” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 19 (1948), 293–325.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Hoeffding, Wassily, and Robbins, Herbert, “The central limit theorem for dependent random variables,” Duke Mathematical Journal, 15 (1948), 773–80.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Hoeffding, Wassily, “An upper bound for the variance of Kendall’s ‘tau’ and of related statistics,” pp. 258–64 in Contributions to Probability and Statistics. Essays in Honor of Harold Hotelling, edited by Ingram Olkin and others, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1960.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Kondo, Tsutomu, “On the standard error of the mean square contingency,” Biometrika, 21 (1929), 377–428.Google Scholar
  16. Kozelka, Robert M., “On some special order statistics from the multinomial distribution,” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1952.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Kozelka, Robert M., “Approximate upper percentage points for extreme values in multinomial sampling,” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 27 (1956), 507–12.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Kruskal, William H., “Ordinal measures of association,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 53 (1958), 814–61.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Mann, H. B., and Wald, A., “On stochastic limit and order relationships,” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 14 (1943), 217–26. (See also Wald, Abraham, Selected Papers in Statistics and Probability, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1955.)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Noether, Gottfried E., “Two confidence intervals for the ratio of two probabilities and some measures of effectiveness,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 52 (1957), 36–45.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Pearson, Karl, “On the probable error of a coefficient of mean square contingency,” Biometrika, 10 (1915), 570–3.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Sneyers, R., “Remarques à propos d’une généralisation de l’indice de similitude de M. Bouët,” Archiv fÜr Meteorologie, Geophysik und Bioklimatologie, Series A: Meteorologie und Geophysik, Band 11, 1. Heft, 1959, 126–35.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Stuart, A., “The estimation and comparison of strengths of association in contingency tables,” Biometrika, 40 (1953), 105–10.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Sundrum, R. M., “Moments of the rank correlation coefficient τ in the general case,” Biometrika, 40 (1953), 409–20.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Weichselberger, K., “Über die Parameterschätzungen bei Kontingenztafeln, deren Randsummen vorgegeben sind,” Metrika, 2 (1959), 100–30 and 198–229.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Young, Andrew W., and Pearson, Karl, “On the probable error of a coefficient of contingency without approximation,” Biometrika, 11 (1915), 215–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Yule, G. Udny, “On the association of attributes in statistics with illustrations from the material from the childhood society, &c.,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 194 (1900), 257–319.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leo A. Goodman
    • 1
  • William H. Kruskal
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations