Difference between logistic regression and chi-square for analysis with no covariates?

Question

I have a binary response variable (0s and 1s), the distribution of which that I want to compare to chance. I understand I could use logistic regression or a chi-square test to do this and that these should be equivalent but my results are slightly different when I use one versus the other and I'm wondering why.

Specifically, there are 44 1s and 14 0s and the expected distribution would be chance (30 1s, 30 0s). When I run a logistic regression with this code:

model<-glm(df$var ~ 1, family=binomial("logit"))

I get a z value of 3.465, which converts to a Wald statistic of 12, and p = .00053.

When I run a chi-square test I get X-squared = 13.067, df = 1, p-value = 0.0003006.

Can someone explain to me where exactly these tests differ such that they yield different results?

A similar post: https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/115835/chi-squared-test-and-logistic-regression/517511#517511 — kjetil b halvorsen, Jul 01 '21 at 00:30

score 1 · Accepted Answer · answered May 18 '16 at 07:46

1

The Pearson $\chi^2$ test, the Wald test, (the likelihood ratio test, Rao's score test, ...) are all approximate. If you have an infinite sample, then they will be exactly the same, but in smaller samples you will find differences.

answered May 18 '16 at 07:46

Maarten Buis

19,189
29
59

Thanks. In that case, is there any reason to prefer one over the other here? – PanPsych May 18 '16 at 14:16
The Pearson $\chi^2$ test tends to perform badly when your expected counts are small. – Maarten Buis May 18 '16 at 14:49

Difference between logistic regression and chi-square for analysis with no covariates?

1 Answers1