IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jedbes/v13y1988i2p173-182.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Normal Approximation to the Binomial Test

Author

Listed:
  • Philip H. Ramsey
  • Patricia P. Ramsey

Abstract

The normal approximation to the binomial test with and without a continuity correction is evaluated in terms of control of Type I errors and power. The normal approximations are evaluated as robust for a given sample size, N, and at a given level α if the true Type I error rate never exceeds 1.5 α. The uncorrected normal test is found to be less robust than is implied by the currently applied guidelines. The most stringent currently used guideline of requiring σ 2 ≥10 is adequate at α = .05 but must be increased to σ 2 ≥35 at α = .01. The corrected test is shown to be robust but not conservative. Both tests are shown to have substantial power loss in comparison to the exact binomial test.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip H. Ramsey & Patricia P. Ramsey, 1988. "Evaluating the Normal Approximation to the Binomial Test," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 13(2), pages 173-182, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:13:y:1988:i:2:p:173-182
    DOI: 10.3102/10769986013002173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/10769986013002173
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3102/10769986013002173?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
    ---><---

    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:sae:jedbes:v:13:y:1988:i:2:p:173-182. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.