multiple comparisons example n.
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Multiple Comparisons: Example

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 17

Multiple Comparisons: Example - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 166 Views
  • Uploaded on

Multiple Comparisons: Example. Study Objective: Test the effect of six varieties of wheat to a particular race of stem rust. Treatment: Wheat Variety Levels: A(i=1), B (i=2), C (i=3), D (i=4), E (i=5), F (i=6) Experimental Unit: Pot of well mixed potting soil.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Multiple Comparisons: Example' - trula


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
multiple comparisons example
Multiple Comparisons: Example

Study Objective: Test the effect of six varieties of wheat to a particular race of stem rust.

Treatment: Wheat Variety

Levels: A(i=1), B (i=2), C (i=3), D (i=4), E (i=5), F (i=6)

Experimental Unit: Pot of well mixed potting soil.

Replication: Four (4) pots per treatment, four(4) plants per pot.

Randomization: Varieties randomized to 24 pots (CRD)

Response: Yield (Yij) (in grams) of wheat variety(i) at maturity in pot (j).

Implementation Notes: Six seeds of a variety are planted in a pot. Once plants emerge, the four most vigorous are retained and inoculated with stem rust.

STA 6166 - MCP

statistics and aov table
Statistics and AOV Table

Rank Variety Mean Yield

5 A 50.3

4 B 69.0

6 C 24.0

2 D 94.0

3 E 75.0

1 F 95.3

n1=n2=n3=n4=n5=n=4

ANOVA Table

Source df MeanSquare F

Variety 5 2976.44 24.80**

Error 18 120.00

STA 6166 - MCP

slide3

Overall F-test indicates that we reject H0 and assume HA

Which mean is not equal to which other means.

Consider all possible comparisons between varieties:

First sort the treatment levels such that the level with the smallest sample mean is first down to the level with the largest sample mean.

Then in a table (matrix) format, compute the differences for all of the t(t-1)/2 possible pairs of level means.

STA 6166 - MCP

differences for all of the t t 1 2 15 possible pairs of level means
Differences for all of the t(t-1)/2=15 possible pairs of level means

Largest Difference

Smallest difference

Question: How big does the difference have to be before we consider it “significantly big”?

STA 6166 - MCP

fisher s protected lsd
Fisher’s Protected LSD

F=24.8 > F5,18,.05=2.77 --> F is significant

Implies that the two treatment level means are statistically different at the a = 0.05 level.

c

a

b

c

d

d

Alternate ways to indicate grouping of means.

STA 6166 - MCP

tukey s w honestly significant difference
Tukey’s W (Honestly Significant Difference)

Not protected hence no preliminary F test required.

Table 10

Implies that the two treatment level means are statistically different at the a = 0.05 level.

a

b

bc

c d

d

d

STA 6166 - MCP

student newman keul procedure snk
Student-Newman-Keul Procedure (SNK)

Not protected hence no preliminary F test required.

Table 10

row Error df=18

a = 0.05

col = r

neighbors

One between

Two between

STA 6166 - MCP

slide8
SNK

Implies that the two treatment level means are statistically different at the a = 0.05 level.

a

b

c

c

d

d

STA 6166 - MCP

duncan s new multiple range test passe
Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (Passe)

Not protected hence no preliminary F test required.

Table 11 (next pages)

row error df = 18

a = 0.05

col = r

neighbors

One between

Two between

STA 6166 - MCP

duncan s mrt
Duncan’s MRT

Implies that the two treatment level means are statistically different at the a = 0.05 level.

a

b

c

c

d

d

STA 6166 - MCP

scheff s s method
Scheffé’s S Method

F=24.8 > F5,18,.05=2.77 => F is significant

For comparing

Reject Ho: l=0 at a=0.05 if

Since each treatment is replicated the same number of time, S will be the same for comparing any pair of treatment means.

STA 6166 - MCP

scheffe s s method
Scheffe’s S Method

Any difference larger than S=28.82 is significant.

Implies that the two treatment level means are statistically different at the a = 0.05 level.

a

a b

b c

b c

c

c

Very conservative => Experimentwise error driven.

STA 6166 - MCP

grouping of ranked means
Grouping of Ranked Means

LSD

SNK

Duncan’s

Tukey’s HSD

Scheffe’s S

Which grouping will you use?

1) What is your risk level?

2) Comparisonwise versus Experimentwise error concerns.

STA 6166 - MCP

so which mc method should you use
So, which MC method should you use…?
  • There is famous story of a statistician and his two clients:
  • Client 1 arrives daily with his hypothesis test and asks for assistance. The statistician helps him using α=0.05. After 1 year they have done 365 tests. If all nulls tested were indeed true, they would have made approx
  • (365)(0.05) = 18
  • erroneous rejections, but they are satisfied with the progress of the research.
  • Client 2 saves all his statistical analysis for end of the year, and approaches the statistician for help. The statistician responds:
  • “My! You have a terrible multiple comparisons problem!”
  • In cases where the researcher is just searching the data (does not have an interest in every comparison made), some form of error rate control beyond the simple Fisher’s LSD may be appropriate. On the other hand, if you definitely have an interest in every comparison, it may be better to use LSD (and accept the comparison-wise error rate).

STA 6166 - MCP

which method to use some practical advice
Which method to use? Some practical advice
  • If comparisons were decided upon before examining the data (best):
  • Just one comparison – use the standard (two-sample) t-test. (In this case use the pooled estimate of the common variance, MSE, and it’s corresponding error df. This is just Fisher’s LSD.)
  • Few comparisons – use Bonferroni adjustment to the t-test. With m comparisons, use /m for the critical value.
  • Many comparisons – Bonferroni becomes increasingly conservative as m increases. At some point it is better to use Tukey (for pairwise comparisons) or Scheffe (for contrasts).
  • If comparisons were decided upon after examining the data:
  • Just want pairwise comparisons – use Tukey.
  • All contrasts (linear combinations of treatment means) – use Scheffe.

STA 6166 - MCP