I have some wishes for the contingency table program. Best (but a lot of work I guess) would be a full log-linear models analysis program. However even without this there are some things that could be added that would be useful.
1. With two-by-two tables it might be useful to include the calculation of odds ratios â€“ these are widely used in medical research.
2. McNemarâ€™s test for correlated proportions in 2 x 2 tables could also be included (Everitt, 1977, pp. 20-22).
3. With r x c tables it might be useful to include the calculation of adjusted standardized residuals. These are suggested by Haberman (1973) (see also Everitt, 1977) and are very useful since they can be compared with the standard normal deviate. I often use them as â€śpost hocâ€ť tests to locate the source of association in a table rather than the approach that you call â€śthe divided chi-squareâ€ť.
4. With ordered r x c tables (i.e., tables where the categories have an intrinsic order) it can be useful to include a test for linear trend (see Everitt, 1977, pp. 51-56).
5. Some measures of the strength of the association in a table may be useful (many journals seem to want Cramerâ€™s V though I find it hard to interpret). Hereâ€™s odds-ratios, and Goodman and Kruskalâ€™s lambdas or Kendallâ€™s tau (much used in â€śordinal statisticsâ€ť) would be nice.
Everitt, B S (1977). The analysis of contingency tables. London: Chapman and Hall.
Haberman, S J (1973). The analysis of residuals in cross-classified tables. Biometrics, 29, 205-220.