A Comprehensive Comparison of the Wald, Wilson, and adjusted Wilson Confidence Intervals for Proportions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The standard confidence interval for a population proportion covered in the overwhelming majority of introductory and intermediate statistics textbooks surprisingly remains the Wald confidence interval despite having a poor coverage probability, especially for small sample sizes or when the unknown population proportion is close to either 0 or 1. Using the mean coverage probability, and for some sample sizes, Agresti and Coull showed not only that the 95% Wilson confidence interval performs better, but also showed that 95% adjusted Wilson of type 4 confidence interval, obtained by simply adding four pseudo-observations, outperforms both the Wald and the Wilson confidence intervals. In this paper, we introduce a rainbow color code and pixel-color plots as ways to comprehensively compare the Wald, Wilson, and adjusted-Wilson of type ε confidence intervals across all sample sizes n=1, 2, dots, 1000, population proportion values p=0.01, 0.02, dots, 0.99, and for the three typical confidence levels. We show not only that adding 3 (resp., 4 and 6) pseudo-observations is the best for the 90% (resp., 95% and 99%) adjusted Wilson confidence interval, but it also performs better than both the 90% (resp., 95% and 99%) Wald and Wilson confidence intervals.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.