Oh ... I should have added that either option could be handled by glm(), of course (provided that you're willing to accept the approximate tests).
But this is getting OT. -- Bert On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Viechtbauer Wolfgang (STAT) <wolfgang.viechtba...@maastrichtuniversity.nl> wrote: > Acutally, > > ?mcnemar.test > > since it is paired data. > > Best, > > Wolfgang > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] >> On Behalf Of Bert Gunter >> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 15:34 >> To: John Sorkin >> Cc: r-help@r-project.org >> Subject: Re: [R] suggestion for proportions >> >> Please! ... ?prop.test >> >> not t tests. >> >> -- Bert >> >> -- >> >> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:21 AM, John Sorkin <jsor...@grecc.umaryland.edu> >> wrote: >> > >From you description, you should not used a paired Student's t-test. >> One uses a paired test when pairs of observations come from the same >> experimental unit (and thus are correlated). You describe a study where >> each experimental unit is tested once and where there are two independent >> groups of experimental units. Look at t.test (i.e. enter ?t.test). >> > John >> > >> >>>> array chip <arrayprof...@yahoo.com> 9/7/2011 4:11 AM >>> >> > Hi, I am wondering if anyone can suggest how to test the equality of 2 >> proportions. The caveat here is that the 2 proportions were calculated >> from the same number of samples using 2 different tests. So essentially we >> are comparing 2 accuracy rates from same, say 100, samples. I think this >> is like a paired test, but don't know if really we need to consider the >> "paired" nature of the data, and if yes then how? Or just use prop.test() >> to compare 2 proportions? >> > >> > Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated. >> > >> > Thanks >> > >> > John > > ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
