Talk:Phi coefficient

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Phi coefficient article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Molecular Biology: COMPBIO

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Computational Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Robotics Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Statistics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Matthews correlation coefficient was merged into Phi coefficient with this edit on 06:33, 17 November 2021 (UTC). The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Clarification requested[edit]

Hello page author:

I am not clear on what is meant by "If both have a 50/50 split, the range of phi will range from −1 to +1." Can you elaborate?

I have looked at the reference by Davenport El-Sanhury (1991), and tested values in a spreadsheet, but I am still none the wiser. When I calculate Phi in the spreadsheet and compare it to the correl() function, the two methods agree.

I was wanting to see if I could use Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) on binary (1,0) data.

Best wishes, Vstrom650 (talk) 16:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC) J.[reply]

Is the formula correct?[edit]

The formula says : $\phi ={\sqrt {\frac {\chi ^{2}}{n}}}$ , but I think that's true only up to sign, since phi can be negative. 109.67.6.27 (talk) 11:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can phi be negative? It is based on chi-square which is always non-negative. Tal Galili (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further question: how many degrees of freedom belong to the chi-squared variable? Surakmath (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate citation?[edit]

I can't find where the source cited for the following claim makes any mention of phi: "Phi is related to the point-biserial correlation coefficient and Cohen's d and estimates the extent of the relationship between two variables (2×2).[4]" [4] Aaron, B., Kromrey, J. D., & Ferron, J. M. (1998, November). Equating r-based and d-based effect-size indices: Problems with a commonly recommended formula. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Florida Educational Research Association, Orlando, FL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED433353) https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED433353 Shedsan (talk) 01:56, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes to transcluded formula template[edit]

Fellow Wikipedians: I've proposed some changes to the formula infobox transcluded into this article, with the goal of trimming down its overpowering (if not excessive) width. My original message with some explanatory notes is at Template talk:Confusion matrix terms#Template_width, and you can see the revised template layout I've proposed by viewing its sandbox version.

There have been no responses over there in well over two months, and since the changes I'm proposing are significant enough to possibly be contentious, I wanted to invite any interested Wikipedians to discuss them over at the template's talk page. Thanks! FeRDNYC (talk) 00:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]