Rejoinder: by W. J. Conover.

The article focuses on comments given by the author on topics related to 2 X 2 contingency tables. In the article two ideas are proposed. The first is that the Yates continuity correction should not be used in 2 X 2 contingency tables unless row and column totals are nonrandom. The second idea is that if row totals, or column totals, are not fixed in advance of the experiment, the Yates correction should not be used for two reasons. First, it provides poor estimates of the desired probabilities. Second, it sometimes exchanges points inside the critical region for points outside the critical region, thus providing a different test. Statistician Olli S. Miettinen points out that much of the controversy over use of a continuity correction is due to a lack of distinguishing between two distinct situations. The first situation involves estimating the exceedance probability associated with a known possible value of a discrete random variable. The second situation involves estimating the exceedance probability associated with an arbitrary real number, such as a quantile from the chi-square' distribution.