Title: More complex contingency tables
Course: UGQuants (SSPS) > Section: Associations Between 2 Variables

More complex contingency tables

Contingency tables where at least one variable has more than two possible values can take a little more time to inspect and interpret, but in terms of their basic principles and essential elements they are no different to simple 2 x 2 tables.

Below are some examples of some rather more complex tables. A good exercise is to practise inspecting the data in each table and then try to summarise the association it shows as briefly as possible. For example (with reference to table 2 in the previous section): ‘people who have university degrees are less likely to smoke cigarettes than those who do not have degrees’. Having done that, the next step is to think about why the variables might be associated in such a way.

Table 6: Opinion on sexual relations between adults of the same sex by experience of university or polytechnic education, Britain (to nearest 1%)

Opinion on sexual relations between the same sex | Did the respondent go to University or Polytechnic? | All
Yes | No
% | % | %
Always or mostly wrong | 24 | 39 | 33
Sometimes or rarely wrong | 18 | 19 | 18
Not wrong at all | 59 | 42 | 49
N | 378 | 592 | 970

Source: British Social Attitudes Survey 2010

Note: 101 cases have been excluded because they did not answer, did not know the answer, or answered ‘depends/varies’ to one or both of the questions.

This table shows that people who have gone to university are less likely to see homosexual relationships as wrong, although nearly a quarter those who have gone to university do feel that these relationships are always or mostly wrong. It could be that the content of (at least some) university programmes of study tends to encourage more tolerant attitudes towards sexual diversity, and/or that a university environment is one where people are more likely to encounter and become familiar with others who may be gay/lesbian.

Table 7: Whether respondent voted in last national election by level of interest in politics, Europe (to nearest 1%)

Voted in last national election? | How interested in politics? | All
Very interested | Quite interested | Hardly interested | Not very interested
% | % | % | %
Yes | 90.3 | 85.9 | 73.8 | 57.8 | 76.4
No | 9.7 | 14.1 | 26.2 | 42.2 | 23.6
N | 4,856 | 16,580 | 16,710 | 8,849 | 47, 995

Source: European Social Survey, 2010 (round 5)

Note: 3,675 cases have been excluded because they were not eligible to vote. A further 519 have been excluded because they did not answer or did not know the answer to one or both of the questions.

This table shows that the vast majority of people who say they are very or quite interested in politics say that they voted at the last national election. However, it is also true that a majority of people who say that they are not at all interested in politics also say that they voted. This suggests that while voting behaviour might be related to some extent to interest in politics, there must be other factors that motivate people to vote. These might include: civic duty; interest in specific issues; or the personal appeal of individual politicians.

Table 8: Subjective general health by subjective financial situation, UK (to nearest 1%)

General health | How well are you managing financially? | All
Living

Comfortably
Doing

alright
Just about getting

by
Finding it quite

difficult
Finding it very

difficult
% | % | % | % | % | %
Excellent or very good | 61 | 55 | 42 | 38 | 31 | 50
Good or fair | 35 | 40 | 49 | 50 | 50 | 43
Poor | 4 | 5 | 9 | 12 | 20 | 7
N | 12,239 | 15,180 | 13,296 | 4,573 | 2,228 | 47,516

Source: UK Household Longitudinal Survey, 2009-10

Note: 3478 cases have been excluded because they did not answer or did not know the answer to one or both of the questions.

Here the table shows a straightforward relationship between subjective financial status and health. The majority of people in the groups who feel most financially secure report excellent or very good health, and only small minorities report poor health. In the most financially insecure groups larger proportions report poor health, although it should be noted that this applies only to a minority in these groups. The evidence indicates that relative poverty (understood in financial terms) and subjective health are associated, although we would expect that other income-related factors (e.g. housing or employment) might also have an effect on health.

In SPSS, you produce contingency tables as follows:

Analyse > Descriptive Statistics > Crosstabs

- you add what you theorise may be the dependent variable to the columns

- you add what you theorise to be the independent/explanatory variable to the rows

(- if you wanted to, you could add a third variable in layer 1)

- if you click on options, a window opens that allows you to produce row or column percentages

Follow the instructions on the right to see how to create contingency tables using the software.