Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
=
o
3. A given pair is significantly different at , if the absolute difference from part 1 exceeds the critical
range in part 2.
Tukey-Kramer Procedure:
1. Compute all possible pairs of absolute differences (Same as Tukeys HSD)
2. For each pair, compute the critical range (will be the same for each):
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ =
o
(only different step!)
3. A given pair is significantly different at , if the absolute difference from part 1 exceeds the critical
range in part 2. (Same as Tukeys HSD)
Are the sample sizes
in each level equal?
Yes: Tukey's HSD
No: Tukey-Kramer
Procedure
Peter Major
4. The Randomised Block-Design
The randomised block-design is another experimental design. It is similar to the completely
randomised design which was the experimental design at in part 2. The key difference is that:
1. Part 2: Completely randomised design: One treatment or independent variable
2. Part 4: Randomised Block-Design: One treatment variable of interest, but ALSO a second
independent variable (called the blocking variable).
Thinking back to our plant example:
1. Dependent variable: Growth rate of bean seeds (what we are interested in finding out)
2. Independent variable: Type of fertiliser (phosphate fertiliser, non-phosphate fertiliser, manure)
We also know that other variables affect the growth rate of the bean seed, but we only want to see the
effect of our type of fertiliser! To isolate the effect fertiliser has we can use blocking variables to block
the effect of other independent variables. In this case, we may want to block the effect of different
amounts of sunlight reaching pot (we cant put all the pots exactly on the same spot of ground, so
some may receive more sun than others we can remove the growth from this effect with blocking
variables).
The ANOVA table for the two-factor design has an additional row for the blocking effect:
Plant Growth (cm) Phosphate Non-Phosphate Manure
lumens (1000-1200) 9 7.65 7.497
lumens (800-1000) 8 6.8 6.664
lumens (600-800) 7.6 6.46 6.3308
lumens (400-600) 8 6.8 6.664
lumens (200-400) 4 3.4 3.332
ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F
Columns (Treatment) 4.5257481 (SSC) 2 (C-1) 2.262874056 (MSC) 72.17457 (MSC/MSE)
Rows (Blocking) 35.627722 (SSR) 4 (n-1) 8.906930389 (MSR) 284.0873 (MSR/MSE)
Error 0.2508223 (SSE) 8 (C-1)(n-1) 0.031352789 (MSE)
Total 40.404292 (SST) 14 (N-1)
Where:
SST = total sum of squares
SSC = sum of squares columns (treatment)
SSR = sum of squares rows (blocking)
SSE = sum of squares error
Hypothesis Test: Two do two hypothesis tests simultaneously!!! One for treatment and one for blocking!
Step 1: State Hypothesis
= = = (no treatment effect is present)
(treatment effect)
Step 2: Decision Rule (always upper-tail F-test)
Reject H
0
if F
calc
> F
(C-1,(C-1)(n-1))
= F
0.05 (2,8)
= 4.46
Step 3: Calculate Test Statistic
F
calc
= MSC/MSE = 72.17
Step 4: Decision: Reject H
0
as F
calc
> F
crit
Step 5: Conclusion: There is sufficient evidence at the 5% level
of significance to conclude that at least one of the average
contributions made by fertiliser types is different to the others.
Treatment type
Blocking
type
Step 1: State Hypothesis
(no blocking effects)
(blocking effects)
Step 2: Decision Rule (always upper-tail F-test)
Reject H
0
if F
calc
> F
(n-1,(C-1)(n-1))
= F
0.05 (4,8)
= 3.84
Step 3: Calculate Test Statistic
F
calc
= MSR/MSE = 284
Step 4: Decision: Reject H
0
as F
calc
> F
crit
Step 5: Conclusion: There is sufficient evidence at the 5%
level of significance to conclude that at least one of the
average contributions made by lumen exposure is different
to the others. (There are blocking effects)