Fishers Exact Test Interpretation

[#1]

Hello! I am analyzing an experiment that I conducted which was made using JMP DOE.  I am interested in using the Fishers Exact Test results (pictured below). I was doing some reading on the JMP help site and it says that values in the tables are not to be considered as P-Values, can these values be taken has regular probability values or is there another way to interpret the data. 

[#2 · Accepted solution]

They are p-values. Can you send me a link to the page in the documentation from which you interpreted otherwise?

What is your alternative hypothesis in the experiment? Isi it two-sided or one-sided?

[#3 · Accepted solution]

Hi @MedianPuppy4982  and @Mark_Bailey : I see where the confusion is coming from.

Here: Fisher’s Exact Test Report (jmp.com)

Therein, it says:

"The Fisher’s Exact Test report includes the following information:

Table Probability (P)

     The probability for the observed table. This is not the p-value for the test.

Two-sided Prob ≤ P

     The significance probability (p-value) for the two-sided test."

The above is true for the general r x c table case as in my example screenshot below (I have a binary response, and a three level factor) where my table is 3 rows by 2 columns.

But, in the 2 x 2 case (like @MedianPuppy4982  has)  it gives p-values only as @MedianPuppy4982  output shows. . 

[#4]

Hi @MRB3855! 

Thank you so much for your help! Do we know why that is? or is it just the general rule for 2x2 tables for the Fishers Exact Test?

[#5]

Good question @MedianPuppy4982 . My guess is (JMP folks may want to jump in here) that with the 2x2 case there are more direct ways (e.g., based on the binomial distribution) to calculate p-values. In the general rxc case, the p-value is calculated as the sum the probabilities from all tables (with the same row and column totals) having a probability less than or equal the probability of the observed table.