Measures of Association: How to Choose?

Abstract

Researchers in sonography, as well as other areas, often wish to measure the strength of relationship or association between two variables. For example, one may wish to determine if, on the average, total cholesterol level increases as age increases for adult American men. However, there are a very large number of measures or coefficients (i.e., a number that indicates the strength of the relationship between two variables) from which to choose. It is not infrequent to find a researcher selecting an incorrect coefficient to measure a given association, thereby possibly rendering a false or misleading conclusion. The choice of the proper measure of association is based on, among other things, the characteristics of each of the two variables involved. This article enumerates every case that can be encountered by the researcher and provides an appropriate measure of association that can be used.

Keywords

coefficient relationship ordinal nominal continuous

References

Goodman LA , Kruskal WH : Measures of Association for Cross Classifications. New York, Springer-Verlag, 1979.

Liebetrau AM : Measures of Association. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage, 1983.

Khamis HJ : Measures of association, in Armitage P , Colton T (eds): Encyclopedia of Biostatistics . 2nd ed. New York, John Wiley, 2004.

Newton RR , Rudestam KE : Your Statistical Consultant. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 1999.

Cohen J. : Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum , 1988.

Sokal RR , Rohlf FJ : Biometry. New York, W. H. Freeman , 1995.

Zar JH : Biostatistical Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1996.

Valentine AL , Pope J. , Read T. : Evaluation of left atrial size and pressure as it relates to left ventricle diastolic measurements in patients with left ventricle hypertrophy. J Diagn Med Sonography 2003;19:73-79.

Chatfield C. : Problem Solving: A Statistician's Guide. 2nd ed. New York, Chapman & Hall, 1995.

10.

Luce RD , Narens L. : Measurement scales on the continuum. Science 1987;236:1527-1532.

11.

Tate RF : Correlation between a discrete and a continuous variable, point-biserial correlation . Ann Math Stat 1954;25:603-607.

12.

Tate RF : The theory of correlation between two continuous variables when one is dichotomized . Biometrika 1955;42:205-216.

13.

Kotz S. , Johnson NL : Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences. Vol. 1. New York, John Wiley, 1982.

14.

Kuklinski JH , West DM : Economic expectations and voting behavior in United States House and Senate elections. Am Polit Sci Rev 1981;75:436-447.

15.

Cureton EE : Rank-biserial correlation. Psychometrika 1956 ;21:287-290.

16.

Fleiss JL : Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York, John Wiley, 1981.

17.

Kendall MG : The Advanced Theory of Statistics. London, Charles Griffin, 1948.

18.

Bland JM , Altman DG : Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-310.

19.

Cohen J. : A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960;20:37-46.

20.

Fleiss JL : The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. New York , John Wiley, 1986.

21.

Fisher LD , van Belle G. : Biostatistics, a Methodology for the Health Sciences. New York, John Wiley, 1993.