Cross-Tabulation Analysis; Making

Comparisons; Controlled Comparisons

June 2, 2008

Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D.

POL 242Y-Y

Cross-Tabulation
Cross-tabulation: A method of hypotheses
testing
Very common
Very simple
Bivariate analysis
Appropriate for nominal, ordinal, and interval-ratio
variables

Bivariate table of percentages

The dependent variable is in rows
The independent variable is in columns
Percentage totals are column totals
2

Example: Cross-tabulation
Research hypothesis: Canadians are
more supportive of equality than
Americans are
The dependent variable: Preference for
equality
in rows

The independent variable: Country

in columns

Example: Cross-tabulation
Table 1. Preference for freedom and equality in
the US and Canada, percent
Freedom
Equality
Total, %
N

United States
67
33
100
1455

Canada
56
44
100
1702

Source: 1996 Lipset/Meltz survey

4

Example: Cross-tabulation
Comparison:
compare percentages across columns at the same value of
the dependent variable
Look for significant differences:
A rule of thumb for survey data: 4% or more in expected
direction

Example from Table 1:

44% of Canadians, compared to 33% of Americans,
prefer equality over freedom

Interpretation of results:
The cross-tabulation analysis supports the research
hypothesis.
5

Graphical Illustration

Figure 1. Preference for freedom and equality in the US and

Canada, percent
Source: 1996 Lipset/Meltz survey

Controlled Comparisons
Analysis of the relationship between and independent
variable and a dependent variable controlling for
another variable
Types of relationships
Additive: Control variable adds to explanation of an
dependent variable by an independent variable
Spurious: Relationship between an independent variable and
a dependent variable disappears when a control variable is
introduced
Interactive: Relationship between an independent variable and
a dependent variable depends on the value of control variable
7

Example: Additive Relationship

Table 2. Preference for freedom and equality in the
US and Canada controlling for gender, % (fictional
data)
Male

Female

US

Canada

US

Canada

Freedom

75

63

59

48

Equality

25

37

41

52

Total, %

100

100

100

100

Additive Relationship: Line Graph

Figure 2. Preference for equality in the US and Canada

controlling for gender, % (fictional data)
9

Example: Spurious Relationship

Table 3. Preference for freedom and equality in the
US and Canada controlling for religiosity, %
(fictional data)
Religious

Non-religious

US

Canada

US

Canada

Freedom

75

74

52

50

Equality

25

26

48

50

Total, %

100

100

100

100

10

Spurious Relationship: Line Graph

Figure 3. Preference for equality in the US and Canada

controlling for religiosity, % (fictional data)
11

Example: Interactive Relationship

Table 4. Preference for freedom and equality in the
US and Canada controlling for race, % (fictional
data)
White

Racial minorities

US

Canada

US

Canada

Freedom

75

60

60

58

Equality

25

40

40

42

Total, %

100

100

100

100

12

Interactive Relationship: Line Graph

Figure 4. Preference for equality in the US and Canada

controlling for race, % (fictional data)
13

Exercise
Political party preference, 2006 Canadian
Election Study Survey, %
Liberal
Conservative
NDP
Bloc Quebecois
Other
None/Dont know
Total, %
N

Englishspeaking
17
15
8
0
3
58
100
873

Frenchspeaking
14
8
2
17
2
57
100
243
14