If you are testing H0: p = 0.6 vs H1: p != 0.6 with a sample of size 10 and you observe X=2, then Pr(X <= 2) + Pr(X >= 8) is not what you want. You can argue that you want Pr(X <= 2) + Pr(X >= 10). Both 2 and 10 are 4 away from the null.

binom.test(2, 10, 0.6, alternative="two.sided") # 0.01834

sum(dbinom(c(0:2, 10), 10, 0.6)) # 0.01834117

You don't want the same number of outcomes on each side unless p=0.5 is the null.

Chris

-----Original Message-----

From: Robert Zimbardo [mailto:

[hidden email]]

Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 2:09 PM

To:

[hidden email]
Subject: [R] Two-tailed exact binomial test with binom.test and sum(dbinom(...))

Hi R experts,

I have a few related questions that are actually a combination of an R

and a hopefully not too trivial (?) statistics question, namely

regarding the computation of an exact two-tailed binomial test.

Let's assume the following scenario:

- number of trials = 10

- p of success = 0.6

(a) Let's also assume we have an H1 that there are more than 6

successes and the number of successes we get is 8. In that case, we do

sum(dbinom(8:10, 10, 0.6)) # 0.1672898

binom.test(8, 10, 0.6, alternative="greater") # 0.1673

(b) Now let's assume we have an H1 that there are fewer than 6

successes and the number of successes we get is 2. In that case, we do

sum(dbinom(0:2, 10, 0.6)) # 0.01229455

binom.test(2, 10, 0.6, alternative="less") # 0.01229

So far no problem. My questions are now concerned with a two-tailed test:

(1). My understanding would be that, if we have an H1 that says "the

number of successes won't be 6", then we can add up the two

probabilities from above:

sum(dbinom(8:10, 10, 0.6)) + sum(dbinom(0:2, 10, 0.6)) # 0.1795843, or just

sum(dbinom(c(0:2, 8:10), 10, 0.6)) # 0.1795843

However, that is not what binom.test(..., alternative="two.sided") does:

binom.test(2, 10, 0.6, alternative="two.sided") # 0.01834, which is

the method of small(er) p-values:

sum(dbinom(0:10, 10, 0.6)[dbinom(0:10, 10, 0.6)<=dbinom(2, 10, 0.6)])

# 0.01834117

Thus, question 1) is, is there a reason binom.test is implemented the

way it is rather than the other way?

(2) I am struggling to understand two-tailed scenarios like this one:

- number of trials = 235

- p of success = 1/6

- successes = 51

That is, cases where my logic of taking the successes+1 extreme cases

on each tail don't work: adding the point probabilities of 51:235 is

fine, but it of course makes no sense to add the point probabilities

for 0:185 to that

sum(dbinom(51:235, 235, 1/6)) # 0.02654425

sum(dbinom(0:185, 235, 1/6)) # 1 (!)

So, while binom.test again does its small(er) p-value thing, ...

binom.test(51, 235, 1/6, alternative="two.sided") # 0.04375

sum(dbinom(0:235, 235, 1/6)[dbinom(0:235, 235, 1/6)<=dbinom(51, 235,

1/6)]) # 0.04374797

... I am wondering how my approach with adding the probabilities of

the same number of events from each tail would be done here ...?

(3) What is people's view on computing the two-tailed test like this,

which leads to an ns result unlike binom.test?

2*sum(dbinom(51:235, 235, 1/6)) # 0.05308849

Any input would be much appreciated!

R.Z.

**********************************************************

Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues

______________________________________________

[hidden email] mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see

https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-helpPLEASE do read the posting guide

http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.htmland provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.