file1

CHAPTER 9 Measures of association 287
Here is the table that shows the results they reported in their paper (p. 23), in full:
Gender, Race, Age Group, Type of Loss, and Type of Death for the Camp Groups A and B (McClatchey et al., 2009)
Camp A Camp B
Demographics n % n % 7 2
df p Value
Gender
Female 21 45.7 31 57.4 1.38 1 .24
Male
Race
25 54.3 23 42.6
Caucasian 25 54.4 33 61.1 .47 2 .79
African American 18 39.1 18 33.3
Latino
Age group
3 6.5 3 5.6
6–11 24 52.2 32 59.3 .51 1 .48
12–16
Type of loss
22 47.8 22 40.7
Mother 18 39.1 21 38.9 .00 1 .98
Father
Type of death
28 60.9 33 61.1
Expected 17 37.0 23 42.6 .33 1 .57
Sudden or violent 29 63.0 31 57.4
Note that for each g 2 performed, the authors have given the g 2 value, the degrees of freedom and
an exact probability level. Note that one of these variables is a 3 ¥ 2 chi-square (see page 284). Which
is it?
Activity 9.8
Draw up a 2 ¥ 2 contingency table for the two different camps, and the two age
groups. If you like, you could run the analysis in SPSS and check your results with
the authors, who found c 2 to be 0.51, df = 1, p = 0.48. Using this information, and the
information in your contingency table, write a few brief sentences interpreting the
results.
Sometimes in the literature you will fi nd researchers who have used Yates’ correction for
continuity. This is a slight adjustment to the formula, used when we have small expected
frequencies, in a 2 ¥ 2 table. In the late 1980s, psychologists were routinely advised to use
Yates’ correction, but now many people feel it is unreasonable and unnecessary to do this