The Combination of 2 x m Contingency Tables

Kincaid, W. M.

doi:10.2307/2527460

Cited by 21 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The differences, which range from 13.3% to 16.4%, were all significant at the .001 level using Kincaid's (1962) In striking contrast to PATTERNED MASK Ss, WHITE MASK Ss showed no WLP at all (see bottom half of Fig. 2).…”

Section: Cueingmentioning

confidence: 87%

Visual factors in word perception

Johnston

McClelland

1973

Perception & Psychophysics

132

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experiment is reported confirming the existence of the "word-letter phenomenon" (WLP): A t tachistoscopic exposure durations, each letter of a four-letter word is perceived more accurately than a single letter. Data obtained rule out several ar tifactual interpretations, including the possibility that perception of letters in a word is facilitated merely by the presence of adjacent contours. The WLP is shown to depend critically on what type of display is used as a preand postexposure field. While a masking field of high-contrast random contours produced a large and reliable WLP, a plain white field eliminated the phenomenon entirely. This pattern of results suggests several ways in which perception at the word level may differ from perception at the letter level.

show abstract

Section: Cueingmentioning

confidence: 87%

Visual factors in word perception

Johnston

McClelland

1973

Perception & Psychophysics

132

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A specialized technique is available for combining 2 x c tables. (40) Comparing Similar Tables. A more likely problem is the comparison of similar tables.…”

Section: Combining Similar Tablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative Analyses Of Geographical Contingency Tables∗

Baker¹,

Lee

1975

The Professional Geographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The frequency of help-and no-help responses is presented in Table 2. A Mantel-Haenszel procedure (Kincaid, 1962) performed on this indicated that there was, in fact, a difference in the frequency of reciprocation between the high-and low-importance conditions when the attribution conditions were combined (x^ = 4.65; df = 1, p < .05). To determine which one of the five attribution conditions generated this difference, a Fisher's exact test was performed on each attribution condition.…”

Section: Reciprocation Measurementioning

confidence: 99%