| Dictionary: analysis of variance |
| 5min Related Video: analysis of variance |
| Sci-Tech Encyclopedia: Analysis of variance |
Total variation in experimental data is partitioned into components assignable to specific sources by the analysis of variance. This statistical technique is applicable to data for which (1) effects of sources are additive, (2) uncontrolled or unexplained experimental variations (which are grouped as experimental errors) are independent of other sources of variation, (3) variance of experimental errors is homogeneous, and (4) experimental errors follow a normal distribution. When data depart from these assumptions, one must exercise extreme care in interpreting the results of an analysis of variance. Statistical tests indicate the contribution of the components to the observed variation. See also
| Business Dictionary: Analysis of Variance (Anova) |
Statistical model that tests whether or not groups of data have the same or differing means. The ANOVA model operates by comparing the amounts of dispersion experienced by each of the groups to the total amount of dispersion in the data.
| Accounting Dictionary: Analysis of Variances |
Seeking causes for variances between standard costs and actual costs; also called variance analysis. A Variance is considered favorable if actual costs are less than standard costs; it is unfavorable if actual costs exceed standard costs. Unfavorable variances need further investigation. Analysis of variances reveals the causes of these deviations. This feedback aids in planning future goals, controlling costs, evaluating performance, and taking corrective action. Management By Exception is based on the analysis of variances, and attention is given to only the variances that require remedial actions.
| Encyclopedia of Public Health: Analysis of Variance |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a statistical technique that can be used to evaluate whether there are differences between the average value, or mean, across several population groups. With this model, the response variable is continuous in nature, whereas the predictor variables are categorical. For example, in a clinical trial of hypertensive patients, ANOVA methods could be used to compare the effectiveness of three different drugs in lowering blood pressure. Alternatively, ANOVA could be used to determine whether infant birth weight is significantly different among mothers who smoked during pregnancy relative to those who did not. In the simplest case, where two population means are being compared, ANOVA is equivalent to the independent two-sample t-test.
One-way ANOVA evaluates the effect of a single factor on a single response variable. For example, a clinician may be interested in determining whether there are differences in the age distribution of patients enrolled in two different study groups. Using ANOVA to make this comparison requires that several assumptions be satisfied. Specifically, the patients must be selected randomly from each of the population groups, a value for the response variable is recorded for each sampled patient, the distribution of the response variable is normally distributed in each population, and the variance of the response variable is the same in each population. In the above example, age would represent the response variable, while the treatment group represents the independent variable, or factor, of interest.
As indicated through its designation, ANOVA compares means by using estimates of variance. Specifically, the sampled observations can be described in terms of the variation of the individual values around their group means, and of the variation of the group means around the overall mean. These measures are frequently referred to as sources of "within-groups" and "between-groups" variability, respectively. If the variability within the k different populations is small relative to the variability between the group means, this suggests that the population means are different. This is formally tested using a test of significance based on the F distribution, which tests the null hypothesis (H0) that the means of the k groups are equal:
H0 = μ1 = μ2 = μ3 = …. μk
An F-test is constructed by taking the ratio of the "between-groups" variation to the "within-groups" variation. If n represents the total number of sampled observations, this ratio has an F distribution with k-1 and n-k degrees in the numerator and denominator, respectively. Under the null hypothesis, the "within-groups" and "between-groups" variance both estimate the same underlying population variance and the F ratio is close to one. If the between-groups variance is much larger than the within-groups, the F ratio becomes large and the associated p-value becomes small. This leads to rejection of the null hypothesis, thereby concluding that the means of the groups are not all equal. When interpreting the results from the ANOVA procedures it is helpful to comment on the strength of the observed association, as significant differences may result simply from having a very large number of samples.
Multi-way analysis of variance (MANOVA) is an extension of the one-way model that allows for the inclusion of additional independent nominal variables. In some analyses, researchers may wish to adjust for group differences for a variable that is continuous in nature. For example, in the example cited above, when evaluating the effectiveness of hypertensive agents administered to three groups, we may wish to control for group differences in the age of the patients. The addition of a continuous variable to an existing ANOVA model is referred to as analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).
In public health, agriculture, engineering, and other disciplines, there are numerous study designs whereby ANOVA procedures can be used to describe collected data. Subtle differences in these study designs require different analytic strategies. For example, selecting an appropriate ANOVA model is dependent on whether repeated measurements were taken on the same patient, whether the same number of samples were taken in each population, and whether the independent variables are considered as fixed or random variables. A description of these caveats is beyond the scope of this encyclopedia, and the reader is referred to the bibliography for more comprehensive coverage of this material. However, several of the more commonly used ANOVA models include the randomized block, the split-plot, and factorial designs.
(SEE ALSO: Epidemiology; Statistics for Public Health)
Bibliography
Cochran, W. G., and Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental Design, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley.
Cox, D. R. (1966). Planning of Experiments. New York: Wiley.
Kleinbaum, D. G.; Kupper, L. L.; and Muller, K. E. (1987). Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariate Methods, 2nd edition. Boston: PWS-Kent Publishing Company.
Snedecor, G. W., and Cochran, W. G. (1989). Statistical Methods, 8th edition. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
— PAUL J. VILLENEUVE
| Sports Science and Medicine: analysis of variance |
A statistical technique to analyse the total variation of a set of observations as measured by the variance of the observations multiplied by their number. Analysis of variance is used to determine whether the differences between the means of several sample groups are statistically significant.
| Wikipedia: Analysis of variance |
In statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a collection of statistical models, and their associated procedures, in which the observed variance is partitioned into components due to different explanatory variables. In its simplest form ANOVA gives a statistical test of whether the means of several groups are all equal, and therefore generalizes Student's two-sample t-test to more than two groups.
Contents |
There are three conceptual classes of such models:
In practice, there are several types of ANOVA depending on the number of treatments and the way they are applied to the subjects in the experiment:
The fixed-effects model of analysis of variance applies to situations in which the experimenter applies several treatments to the subjects of the experiment to see if the response variable values change. This allows the experimenter to estimate the ranges of response variable values that the treatment would generate in the population as a whole.
Random effects models are used when the treatments are not fixed. This occurs when the various treatments (also known as factor levels) are sampled from a larger population. Because the treatments themselves are random variables, some assumptions and the method of contrasting the treatments differ from ANOVA model 1.
Most random-effects or mixed-effects models are not concerned with making inferences concerning the particular sampled factors. For example, consider a large manufacturing plant in which many machines produce the same product. The statistician studying this plant would have very little interest in comparing the three particular machines to each other. Rather, inferences that can be made for all machines are of interest, such as their variability and the mean.
Levene's test for homogeneity of variances is typically used to confirm homoscedasticity. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov or the Shapiro-Wilk test may be used to confirm normality. Some authors claim that the F-test is unreliable if there are deviations from normality (Lindman, 1974) while others claim that the F-test is robust (Ferguson & Takane, 2005, pp.261-2). The Kruskal-Wallis test is a nonparametric alternative which does not rely on an assumption of normality.
These together form the common assumption that the errors are independently, identically, and normally distributed for fixed effects models, or:

The fundamental technique is a partitioning of the total sum of squares (abbreviated SS) into components related to the effects used in the model. For example, we show the model for a simplified ANOVA with one type of treatment at different levels.

So, the number of degrees of freedom (abbreviated df) can be partitioned in a similar way and specifies the chi-square distribution which describes the associated sums of squares.

See also Lack-of-fit sum of squares.
The F-test is used for comparisons of the components of the total deviation. For example, in one-way, or single-factor ANOVA, statistical significance is tested for by comparing the F test statistic


where:
, I = number of treatmentsand
, nT = total number of casesto the F-distribution with I-1,nT-I degrees of freedom. Using the F-distribution is a natural candidate because the test statistic is the quotient of two mean sums of squares which have a chi-square distribution.
As first suggested by Conover and Iman in 1981, in many cases when the data do not meet the assumptions of ANOVA, one can replace each original data value by its rank from 1 for the smallest to N for the largest, then run a standard ANOVA calculation on the rank-transformed data. "Where no equivalent nonparametric methods have yet been developed such as for the two-way design, rank transformation results in tests which are more robust to non-normality, and resistant to outliers and non-constant variance, than is ANOVA without the transformation." (Helsel & Hirsch, 2002, Page 177). However Seaman et al. (1994) noticed that the rank transformation of Conover and Iman (1981) is not appropriate for testing interactions among effects in a factorial design as it can cause an increase in Type I error (alpha error). Furthermore, if both main factors are significant there is little power to detect interactions.
A variant of rank-transformation is 'quantile normalization' in which a further transformation is applied to the ranks such that the resulting values have some defined distribution (often a normal distribution with a specified mean and variance). Further analyses of quantile-normalized data may then assume that distribution to compute significance values.
Several standardized measures of effect are used within the context of ANOVA to describe the degree of relationship between a predictor or set of predictors and the dependent variable. Effect size estimates are reported to allow researchers to compare findings in studies and across disciplines. Common effect size estimates reported in bivariate (e.g. ANOVA) and multivariate (MONOVA, CANOVA, Multiple Discriminant Analysis) statistical analysis includes: Eta-squared, partial eta-squared, omega and intercorrelation (Strang, 2009).
η2 ( eta-squared ): Eta-squared describes the ratio of variance explained in the dependent variable by a predictor while controlling for other predictors. Eta squared is a biased estimator of the variance explained by the model in the population (it only estimates effect size in the sample). On average it overestimates the variance explained in the population. As the sample size gets larger the amount of bias gets smaller. It is, however, an easily calculated estimator of the proportion of the variance in a population explained by the treatment. Note that earlier versions of statistical software (such as SPSS) incorrectly reports Partial eta squared under the misleading title "Eta squared".

Partial η2 ( Partial eta-squared ): Partial eta-squared describes the "proportion of total variation attributable to the factor, partialling out (excluding) other factors from the total nonerror variation" (Pierce, Block & Aguinis, 2004, p. 918). Partial eta squared is normally higher than eta squared (except in simple one-factor models).

Several variations of benchmarks exist.
The generally-accepted regression benchmark for effect size comes from (Cohen, 1992; 1988): 0.20 is a minimal solution (but significant in social science research); 0.50 is a medium effect; anything equal to or greater than 0.80 is a large effect size (Keppel & Wickens, 2004; Cohen, 1992).
Since this common interpretation of effect size has been repeated from Cohen (1988) over the years with no change or comment to validity for contemporary experimental research, it is questionable outside of psychological/behavioural studies, and more so questionable even then without a full understanding of the limitations ascribed by Cohen. Note: The use of specific partial eta-square values for large medium or small as a "rule of thumb" should be avoided.
Nevertheless, alternative rules of thumb have emerged in certain disciplines: Small = 0.01; medium = 0.06; large = 0.14 (Kittler, Menard & Phillips, 2007).
Omega Squared Omega squared provides a relatively unbiased estimate of the variance explained in the population by a predictor variable. It takes random error into account more so than eta squared, which is incredibly biased to be too large. The calculations for omega squared differ depending on the experimental design. For a fixed experimental design (in which the categories are explicitly set), omega squared is calculated as follows: [2]

Cohen's f This measure of effect size is frequently encountered when performing power analysis calculations. Conceptually it represents the square root of variance explained over variance not explained.
A statistically significant effect in ANOVA is often followed up with one or more different follow-up tests. This can be done in order to assess which groups are different from which other groups or to test various other focused hypotheses. Follow up tests are often distinguished in terms of whether they are planned (a priori) or post hoc. Planned tests are determined before looking at the data and post hoc tests are performed after looking at the data. Post hoc tests such as Tukey's test most commonly compare every group mean with every other group mean and typically incorporate some method of controlling of Type I errors. Comparisons, which are most commonly planned, can be either simple or compound. Simple comparisons compare one group mean with one other group mean. Compound comparisons typically compare two sets of groups means where one set has at two or more groups (e.g., compare average group means of group A, B and C with group D). Comparisons can also look at tests of trend, such as linear and quadratic relationships, when the independent variable involves ordered levels.
Power analysis is often applied in the context of ANOVA in order to assess the probability of successfully rejecting the null hypothesis if we assume a certain ANOVA design, effect size in the population, sample size and alpha level. Power analysis can assist in study design by determining what sample size would be required in order to have a reasonable chance of rejecting the null hypothesis.
In a first experiment, Group A is given vodka, Group B is given gin, and Group C is given a placebo. All groups are then tested with a memory task. A one-way ANOVA can be used to assess the effect of the various treatments (that is, the vodka, gin, and placebo).
In a second experiment, Group A is given vodka and tested on a memory task. The same group is allowed a rest period of five days and then the experiment is repeated with gin. The procedure is repeated using a placebo. A one-way ANOVA with repeated measures can be used to assess the effect of the vodka versus the impact of the placebo.
In a third experiment testing the effects of expectations, subjects are randomly assigned to four groups:
Each group is then tested on a memory task. The advantage of this design is that multiple variables can be tested at the same time instead of running two different experiments. Also, the experiment can determine whether one variable affects the other variable (known as interaction effects). A factorial ANOVA (2×2) can be used to assess the effect of expecting vodka or the placebo and the actual reception of either.
Ronald Fisher first used variance in his 1918 paper The Correlation Between Relatives on the Supposition of Mendelian Inheritance[3]. His first application of the analysis of variance was published in 1921[4]. Analysis of variance became widely known after being included in Fisher's 1925 book Statistical Methods for Research Workers.
| Wikiversity has learning materials about Analysis of variance |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| Best of the Web: analysis of variance |
Some good "analysis of variance" pages on the web:
Math mathworld.wolfram.com |
| MANOVA | |
| covariance analysis (statistics) | |
| residual variance (statistics) |
| An analysis of variance differs from a t test for independent means in that an analysis of variance? Read answer... | |
| How does analysis of variance work? Read answer... | |
| In a one-way analysis of variance if the null hypothesis is rejected what does it indicate? Read answer... |
| Is analysis of variance a parametric test? | |
| Basic assumption in analysis of variance? | |
| To understand univariate analysis of variance? |
Copyrights:
![]() | Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Sci-Tech Encyclopedia. McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology. Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Business Dictionary. Dictionary of Business Terms. Copyright © 2000 by Barron's Educational Series, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Accounting Dictionary. Dictionary of Accounting Terms. Copyright © 2005 by Barron's Educational Series, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Encyclopedia of Public Health. Encyclopedia of Public Health. Copyright © 2002 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Sports Science and Medicine. The Oxford Dictionary of Sports Science & Medicine. Copyright © Michael Kent 1998, 2006, 2007. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Analysis of variance". Read more |
Mentioned in