IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/amstat/v78y2024i2p253-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Application of the Likelihood Ratio Test and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Test to Discrimination Cases

Author

Listed:
  • Weiwen Miao
  • Joseph L. Gastwirth

Abstract

In practice, the ultimate outcome of many important discrimination cases, for example, the Wal-Mart, Nike and Goldman-Sachs equal pay cases, is determined at the stage when the plaintiffs request that the case be certified as a class action. The primary statistical issue at this time is whether the employment practice in question leads to a common pattern of outcomes disadvantaging most plaintiffs. However, there are no formal procedures or government guidelines for checking whether an employment practice results in a common pattern of disparity. This article proposes using the slightly modified likelihood ratio test and the one-sided Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test to examine data relevant to deciding whether this commonality requirement is satisfied. Data considered at the class certification stage from several actual cases are analyzed by the proposed procedures. The results often show that the employment practice at issue created a common pattern of disparity, however, based on the evidence presented to the courts, the class action requests were denied.

Suggested Citation

  • Weiwen Miao & Joseph L. Gastwirth, 2024. "The Application of the Likelihood Ratio Test and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Test to Discrimination Cases," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 78(2), pages 253-263, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:78:y:2024:i:2:p:253-263
    DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2023.2259969
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2023.2259969
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00031305.2023.2259969?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:amstat:v:78:y:2024:i:2:p:253-263. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTAS20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.