The Purpose of an Experiment We usually want to answer certain questions posed by the objectives of the experiment Irrigation experiment (a 2 x 2 factorial)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Week 2 – PART III POST-HOC TESTS. POST HOC TESTS When we get a significant F test result in an ANOVA test for a main effect of a factor with more than.
Advertisements

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
The Purpose of an Experiment We usually want to answer certain questions posed by the objectives of the experiment Irrigation experiment (a 2 x 2 factorial)
1 Chapter 4 Experiments with Blocking Factors The Randomized Complete Block Design Nuisance factor: a design factor that probably has an effect.
Chapter 4 Randomized Blocks, Latin Squares, and Related Designs
Design of Experiments and Analysis of Variance
Three-Factor Experiments Design selection, treatment composition, and randomization remain the same Each additional factor adds a layer of complexity to.
N-way ANOVA. Two-factor ANOVA with equal replications Experimental design: 2  2 (or 2 2 ) factorial with n = 5 replicate Total number of observations:
1 Multifactor ANOVA. 2 What We Will Learn Two-factor ANOVA K ij =1 Two-factor ANOVA K ij =1 –Interaction –Tukey’s with multiple comparisons –Concept of.
Part I – MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS
The Statistical Analysis Partitions the total variation in the data into components associated with sources of variation –For a Completely Randomized Design.
Chapter 3 Experiments with a Single Factor: The Analysis of Variance
Lecture 9: One Way ANOVA Between Subjects
Chapter 10 - Part 1 Factorial Experiments.
Introduction to Probability and Statistics Linear Regression and Correlation.
Analysis of Variance & Multivariate Analysis of Variance
One-Way ANOVA Independent Samples. Basic Design Grouping variable with 2 or more levels Continuous dependent/criterion variable H  :  1 =  2 =... =
If = 10 and = 0.05 per experiment = 0.5 Type I Error Rates I.Per Comparison II.Per Experiment (frequency) = error rate of any comparison = # of comparisons.
Chapter 12: Analysis of Variance
22-1 Factorial Treatments (§ 14.3, 14.4, 15.4) Completely randomized designs - One treatment factor at t levels. Randomized block design - One treatment.
Analysis of Variance. ANOVA Probably the most popular analysis in psychology Why? Ease of implementation Allows for analysis of several groups at once.
Psy B07 Chapter 1Slide 1 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE. Psy B07 Chapter 1Slide 2 t-test refresher  In chapter 7 we talked about analyses that could be conducted.
1 One Way Analysis of Variance – Designed experiments usually involve comparisons among more than two means. – The use of Z or t tests with more than two.
QNT 531 Advanced Problems in Statistics and Research Methods
Experimental Design An Experimental Design is a plan for the assignment of the treatments to the plots in the experiment Designs differ primarily in the.
So far... We have been estimating differences caused by application of various treatments, and determining the probability that an observed difference.
Chapter 10 Analysis of Variance.
Orthogonal Linear Contrasts This is a technique for partitioning ANOVA sum of squares into individual degrees of freedom.
Psychology 301 Chapters & Differences Between Two Means Introduction to Analysis of Variance Multiple Comparisons.
1 Chapter 13 Analysis of Variance. 2 Chapter Outline  An introduction to experimental design and analysis of variance  Analysis of Variance and the.
Two-Way Balanced Independent Samples ANOVA Computations.
Testing Hypotheses about Differences among Several Means.
Chapter 19 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). ANOVA How to test a null hypothesis that the means of more than two populations are equal. H 0 :  1 =  2 =
Three-Factor Experiments Design selection, treatment composition, and randomization remain the same Each additional factor adds a layer of complexity to.
Orthogonal Linear Contrasts This is a technique for partitioning ANOVA sum of squares into individual degrees of freedom.
Simple Linear Regression ANOVA for regression (10.2)
Control of Experimental Error Blocking - –A block is a group of homogeneous experimental units –Maximize the variation among blocks in order to minimize.
Strip-Plot Designs Sometimes called split-block design For experiments involving factors that are difficult to apply to small plots Three sizes of plots.
1 Psych 5510/6510 Chapter 14 Repeated Measures ANOVA: Models with Nonindependent ERRORs Part 3: Factorial Designs Spring, 2009.
1 Orthogonality One way to delve further into the impact a factor has on the yield is to break the Sum of Squares (SSQ) into “orthogonal” components. If.
CPE 619 One Factor Experiments Aleksandar Milenković The LaCASA Laboratory Electrical and Computer Engineering Department The University of Alabama in.
Experiment Design Overview Number of factors 1 2 k levels 2:min/max n - cat num regression models2k2k repl interactions & errors 2 k-p weak interactions.
Analysis and Interpretation: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Random samples of size n 1, n 2, …,n k are drawn from k populations with means  1,  2,…,  k and with common variance  2. Let x ij be the j-th measurement.
Orthogonal Linear Contrasts A technique for partitioning ANOVA sum of squares into individual degrees of freedom.
Chapter 4 Analysis of Variance
IE241: Introduction to Design of Experiments. Last term we talked about testing the difference between two independent means. For means from a normal.
One-Way Analysis of Variance Recapitulation Recapitulation 1. Comparing differences among three or more subsamples requires a different statistical test.
Tests after a significant F
Factorial Design of Experiments. An Economy of Design Two or more levels of each factor (variable) are administered in combination with the two or more.
1 Lecture 15 One Way Analysis of Variance  Designed experiments usually involve comparisons among more than two means.  The use of Z or t tests with.
1 Statistical Analysis Professor Lynne Stokes Department of Statistical Science Lecture #10 Testing the Statistical Significance of Factor Effects.
Stats/Methods II JEOPARDY. Jeopardy Estimation ANOVA shorthand ANOVA concepts Post hoc testsSurprise $100 $200$200 $300 $500 $400 $300 $400 $300 $400.
ENGR 610 Applied Statistics Fall Week 12 Marshall University CITE Jack Smith.
F73DA2 INTRODUCTORY DATA ANALYSIS ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE.
Six Easy Steps for an ANOVA 1) State the hypothesis 2) Find the F-critical value 3) Calculate the F-value 4) Decision 5) Create the summary table 6) Put.
Chapter 13 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). ANOVA can be used to test for differences between three or more means. The hypotheses for an ANOVA are always:
Week 2 – PART III POST-HOC TESTS.
Two-Way Analysis of Variance Chapter 11.
Two way ANOVA with replication
CHAPTER 13 Design and Analysis of Single-Factor Experiments:
Multiple comparisons
Two way ANOVA with replication
Two-Factor Full Factorial Designs
Chapter 5 Introduction to Factorial Designs
Ch. 14: Comparisons on More Than Two Conditions
Linear Contrasts and Multiple Comparisons (§ 8.6)
Multiple comparisons - multiple pairwise tests - orthogonal contrasts
Main Effects and Interaction Effects
Chapter 10 – Part II Analysis of Variance
Presentation transcript:

The Purpose of an Experiment We usually want to answer certain questions posed by the objectives of the experiment Irrigation experiment (a 2 x 2 factorial) –1 cm/ha applied early    –1 cm/ha applied late    –2 cm/ha applied early    –2 cm/ha applied late   

Questions we might ask: Is there a yield difference between 2 cm/ha and 1 ha-cm of water applied?       vs      Does it make a difference whether the water is applied early or late?       vs      Does the difference between 1 and 2 cm/ha depend on whether the water is applied early or late?       vs     

To test the hypothesis We would test the hypothesis that the grouped means are equal or said another way - that the difference between the two groups is zero.      =       or          = 

Contrasts of Means Think of the contrast as a linear function of the means L =          t  t H 0 : L = 0 H a : L  0 This would be a legitimate contrast if and only if:  j = 0 To estimate the contrast: L(L) = L+ t  V(L) The variance of a contrast V(L) = (  k j 2 )/r * MSE for equal replication V(L) = (k 1 2 /r 1 + k 2 2 /r k t 2 /r t )*MSE for unequal replication Interval estimate of a contrast

Orthogonal Contrasts With t treatments, it is possible to form t-1 contrasts that are statistically independent of each other (i.e., one contrast conveys no information about the other) In order to be statistically independent, they must be orthogonal Contrasts are orthogonal if and only if the sum of the products of the coefficients equals 0 Where j = the j th mean in the linear contrast

For Example: A 2 factor factorial: P(2 levels), K(2 levels) –no P, no K (P 0 K 0 ) –20 kg/ha P, no K (P 1 K 0 ) –no P, 20 kg/ha K(P 0 K 1 ) –20 kg/ha P, 20 kg/ha K (P 1 K 1 ) Questions we might ask –Any difference between P and K when used alone? –Any difference when the two fertilizers are used alone versus together? –Any difference when there is no fertilizer versus when there is some?

Table of Contrasts ContrastP 0 K 0 P 1 K 0 P 0 K 1 P 1 K 1 Sum P vs K Alone vs Together None vs Some Test for Orthogonality (0x0) + (1x-1) + (-1x-1) + (0x2) = =0 (0x-3) + (1x1) + (-1x1) + (0x1) = =0 (0x -3) + (-1 x 1) + (-1 x 1) + (2 x 1) = = 0

Or another set: ContrastP 0 K 0 P 1 K 0 P 0 K 1 P 1 K 1 Sum P (Main Effect) K (Main Effect) PK (Interaction) Test for Orthogonality (-1 x -1) + (1 x -1) + (-1 x 1) + (1 x 1) = =0 (-1 x 1) + (1 x -1) + (-1 x -1) + (1 x 1) = = 0 (-1 x 1) + (-1 x -1) + (1 x -1) + (1 x 1) = = 0

Here is another example: A fertilizer experiment with 5 treatments: –C=Control, no fertilizer –PB=Banded phosphate –PS=Broadcast (surface) phosphate –NPB=Nitrogen with banded phosphate –NPS=Nitrogen with broadcast phosphate We might want to answer the following: –Is there a difference between fertilizer and no fertilizer? –Does the method of P application make a difference? –Does added N make a difference? –Does the effect of N depend on the method of P application?

Table of Contrasts: ContrastCPBPSNPBNPSSum None vs some Band vs broadcast N vs no N N vs (B vs S) Test for Orthogonality (-4x0) + (1x1) + (+1x-1) + (1x1) + (1x-1) = = 0 (-4x0) + (1x-1) + (1x-1) + (1x1) + (1x1) = = 0 (-4x0) + (1x-1) + (1x1) + (1x1) + (1x-1) = = 0 (0x0) + (1x-1) + (-1x-1) + (1x1) + (-1x1) = = 0 (0x0) + (1x-1) + (-1x1) + (1x1) + (-1x-1) = = 0 (0x0) + (-1x-1) + (-1x1) + (1x1) + (1x-1) = = 0

Contrast of Means We can partition the treatment SS into SS for contrasts with the following conditions: –Treatments are equally replicated –t = number of treatments –r = number of replications per treatment – = mean of yields on the j-th treatment – Contrast SS will add up to SST (if you have a complete set of t-1 orthogonal contrasts) It is not necessary to have a complete set of contrasts provided that those in your subset are orthogonal to each other

Contrast of Means Under these conditions – – V(L) = [(  j 2 )/r] * MSE for equal replication Caution – old notes, old homework, and old exams – Calculations are based on totals – SSL = MSL = – V(L) = (r  j 2 ) * MSE for equal replication

Drawing the contrasts - Not always easy Between group comparison NumberSet 1Set 2Single df contrast 1g1,g2,g3g4,g52(G1+G2+G3)-3(G4+G5) 2g1g2,g32G1-(G2+G3) 3g2g3G2-G3 4g4g5G4-G5 Divide and conquer

Revisiting the PxK Experiment ContrastP 0 K 0 P 1 K 0 P 0 K 1 P 1 K 1 LSS(L) P vs K Alone vs Together None vs Some TreatmentP 0 K 0 P 1 K 0 P 0 K 1 P 1 K 1 Means (3 reps) SST= SS(L i )= r*L i 2 /  j k ij 2

Another example A weed scientist wanted to study the effect of a new, all- purpose herbicide to control grassy weeds in lentils. He decided to try the herbicide both as a preemergent and as a postemergent spray. He also wanted to test the effect of phosphorus. –ControlC –Hand weedingW1 –Preemergent sprayW2 –Postemergent sprayW3 –Hand weeding + phosphorusPW1 –Preemergent spray + phosphorusPW2 –Postemergent spray + phosphorusPW3

Treatment Means TreatmentIIIIIIMean C W W W PW PW PW Mean

ANOVA SourcedfSSMSF Total20121, Block23, , Treatment6115, , ** Error121, Treatments are highly significant so we can divide into contrasts

Orthogonal Contrasts CW1W2W3PW1PW2PW3 Contrast LSS(L)F ** ** ** ns ns ns 1 =Some vs none 2 =P vs no P 3 =Hand vs Chemical 4 =pre vs post emergence 5 =Interaction 2 x 3 6 =Interaction 2 x 4 ControlC Hand weedingW1 Preemergent sprayW2 Postemergent sprayW3 Hand weeding + PPW1 Preemergent spray + PPW2 Postemergent spray + PPW3

So What Does This Mean? The treated plots outyielded the untreated check plots Fertilized plots outyielded unfertilized plots by an average of about 87 kg/plot Hand weeding resulted in higher yield than did herbicide regardless of when applied by about 45 kg/plot No difference in effect between preemergence and postemergence application of the herbicide The differences in weed control treatments did not depend on the presence or absence of phosphorus fertilizer