In statistics, is there a formal name to the two variables of a two-dimensional contingency table?
$begingroup$
Is there a formal terminology for the variable in the columns and for the variable in the rows?
terminology contingency-tables
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Is there a formal terminology for the variable in the columns and for the variable in the rows?
terminology contingency-tables
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Is there a formal terminology for the variable in the columns and for the variable in the rows?
terminology contingency-tables
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
$endgroup$
Is there a formal terminology for the variable in the columns and for the variable in the rows?
terminology contingency-tables
terminology contingency-tables
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
asked Jan 16 at 14:08
rmagnormagno
1959
1959
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The names row variable and column variable work fine for me, if indeed names are needed at all. It is perhaps more common, and typically more helpful, to refer to the names of the variables (gender, tree species, enjoyment of movie, attitude to some proposal, or whatever). Which is presented in rows and which in columns is immaterial to the analysis of contingency tables. It's just a matter of which presentation is easier to produce and to read.
If one is a response (outcome, ...) and the other a predictor (covariate, ...) you can always say so. But often the response is the count or frequency itself, as given in the cells of the table, and the margins represent predictors.
Broadly, which variable goes in the rows and which in the columns is a matter of convenience as much as logic or even convention. It is common advice that it is easier to read down columns than to compare across rows.
In practice, however, the shape of the table can dominate decisions. For example, a 2 x 20 table (say) is usually going to be shown as 20 rows x 2 columns, regardless of the contents or meaning of the variables. That applies to displays online and to those in print. (No talk should include a 2 x 20 table....)
The question refers specifically to two-dimensional tables. There does not seem to be much agreement on, or much need for, standard terminology for third or higher dimensions of three- or higher-dimensional tables, which are often best presented otherwise in any case.
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
3
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "65"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f387532%2fin-statistics-is-there-a-formal-name-to-the-two-variables-of-a-two-dimensional%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The names row variable and column variable work fine for me, if indeed names are needed at all. It is perhaps more common, and typically more helpful, to refer to the names of the variables (gender, tree species, enjoyment of movie, attitude to some proposal, or whatever). Which is presented in rows and which in columns is immaterial to the analysis of contingency tables. It's just a matter of which presentation is easier to produce and to read.
If one is a response (outcome, ...) and the other a predictor (covariate, ...) you can always say so. But often the response is the count or frequency itself, as given in the cells of the table, and the margins represent predictors.
Broadly, which variable goes in the rows and which in the columns is a matter of convenience as much as logic or even convention. It is common advice that it is easier to read down columns than to compare across rows.
In practice, however, the shape of the table can dominate decisions. For example, a 2 x 20 table (say) is usually going to be shown as 20 rows x 2 columns, regardless of the contents or meaning of the variables. That applies to displays online and to those in print. (No talk should include a 2 x 20 table....)
The question refers specifically to two-dimensional tables. There does not seem to be much agreement on, or much need for, standard terminology for third or higher dimensions of three- or higher-dimensional tables, which are often best presented otherwise in any case.
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
3
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The names row variable and column variable work fine for me, if indeed names are needed at all. It is perhaps more common, and typically more helpful, to refer to the names of the variables (gender, tree species, enjoyment of movie, attitude to some proposal, or whatever). Which is presented in rows and which in columns is immaterial to the analysis of contingency tables. It's just a matter of which presentation is easier to produce and to read.
If one is a response (outcome, ...) and the other a predictor (covariate, ...) you can always say so. But often the response is the count or frequency itself, as given in the cells of the table, and the margins represent predictors.
Broadly, which variable goes in the rows and which in the columns is a matter of convenience as much as logic or even convention. It is common advice that it is easier to read down columns than to compare across rows.
In practice, however, the shape of the table can dominate decisions. For example, a 2 x 20 table (say) is usually going to be shown as 20 rows x 2 columns, regardless of the contents or meaning of the variables. That applies to displays online and to those in print. (No talk should include a 2 x 20 table....)
The question refers specifically to two-dimensional tables. There does not seem to be much agreement on, or much need for, standard terminology for third or higher dimensions of three- or higher-dimensional tables, which are often best presented otherwise in any case.
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
3
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The names row variable and column variable work fine for me, if indeed names are needed at all. It is perhaps more common, and typically more helpful, to refer to the names of the variables (gender, tree species, enjoyment of movie, attitude to some proposal, or whatever). Which is presented in rows and which in columns is immaterial to the analysis of contingency tables. It's just a matter of which presentation is easier to produce and to read.
If one is a response (outcome, ...) and the other a predictor (covariate, ...) you can always say so. But often the response is the count or frequency itself, as given in the cells of the table, and the margins represent predictors.
Broadly, which variable goes in the rows and which in the columns is a matter of convenience as much as logic or even convention. It is common advice that it is easier to read down columns than to compare across rows.
In practice, however, the shape of the table can dominate decisions. For example, a 2 x 20 table (say) is usually going to be shown as 20 rows x 2 columns, regardless of the contents or meaning of the variables. That applies to displays online and to those in print. (No talk should include a 2 x 20 table....)
The question refers specifically to two-dimensional tables. There does not seem to be much agreement on, or much need for, standard terminology for third or higher dimensions of three- or higher-dimensional tables, which are often best presented otherwise in any case.
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
$endgroup$
The names row variable and column variable work fine for me, if indeed names are needed at all. It is perhaps more common, and typically more helpful, to refer to the names of the variables (gender, tree species, enjoyment of movie, attitude to some proposal, or whatever). Which is presented in rows and which in columns is immaterial to the analysis of contingency tables. It's just a matter of which presentation is easier to produce and to read.
If one is a response (outcome, ...) and the other a predictor (covariate, ...) you can always say so. But often the response is the count or frequency itself, as given in the cells of the table, and the margins represent predictors.
Broadly, which variable goes in the rows and which in the columns is a matter of convenience as much as logic or even convention. It is common advice that it is easier to read down columns than to compare across rows.
In practice, however, the shape of the table can dominate decisions. For example, a 2 x 20 table (say) is usually going to be shown as 20 rows x 2 columns, regardless of the contents or meaning of the variables. That applies to displays online and to those in print. (No talk should include a 2 x 20 table....)
The question refers specifically to two-dimensional tables. There does not seem to be much agreement on, or much need for, standard terminology for third or higher dimensions of three- or higher-dimensional tables, which are often best presented otherwise in any case.
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
answered Jan 16 at 16:28
Nick CoxNick Cox
38.5k483128
38.5k483128
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
3
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
3
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
$begingroup$
I see your point, fair enough!
$endgroup$
– rmagno
Jan 16 at 16:33
3
3
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
+10. Nice answer, @Nick Cox. The only thing I'll add is that some fields of study have adopted, as a norm or unspoken rule, certain ways that $2times 2$ tables should be presented within their fields in the literature. For example, in epidemiology, medicine, and public health, "Exposures" or "Risk Factors" are usually placed on the left side of the table (rows) and the Disease or Outcome is usually presented at the top of the table (columns). The same is true for some other fields, but the rows and column are completely interchangeable as you've said..
$endgroup$
– StatsStudent
Jan 16 at 16:53
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
$begingroup$
That's a good point. Feel free to edit it into my answer or to add your own.
$endgroup$
– Nick Cox
Jan 16 at 17:04
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f387532%2fin-statistics-is-there-a-formal-name-to-the-two-variables-of-a-two-dimensional%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
