In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donald Burrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Since a proportion is formally a mean (of a binary variable whose
>possible values are 0 and 1), and the usual two-sample test for
>proportions is formally identical to the two-sample test for means,
>I should think that if the latter is based on a LRT, so should be the
>former.
>  There may be some complication induced by the use of a large-sample
>normal approximation, for which the LRT argument above would hold,
>versus the binomial distribution procedure, for which I am less certain.

Not quite.  There is a difference, especially for small and
moderate sample sizes.  

Also, the means and variances are related, so that a t-test
is not the right thing to do.
-- 
This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558
.
.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
.                  http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/                    .
=================================================================

Reply via email to