MANOVA

Multivariate Analysis of Variance

Presented by Ann Deshotels

 MANOVA
MANOVA is a complex statistic that is similar to ANOVA,
but analyzes multiple dependent variables (DV) together
at one time.
DVs should be related conceptually, and should be
correlated with one another at a low to moderate level,
because there is a risk of multicollinearity with a high
correlation.
If DVs are uncorrelated, there is usually no reason to
analyze them together.
The General Linear Model in SPSS provides a
multivariate F based on the linear combination of DVs
that maximally distinguish the groups. This multivariate
result is the MANOVA.
 Assumptions

Independent observations (each

persons scores are independent of
every other persons scores).
Multivariate normality
Homogeneity of variance/covariance
matrices across groups
 Conditions for MANOVA
Sample sizes should be sufficiently large.
If the number of variables times the number of
levels of the within-subjects variable approaches
the sample size, then the double multivariate
analysis should not be conducted.

The potential for multicollinearity among the DVs,

because it can effect both results and the validity of
interpretation of results.

Homogeneity of variance/covariance matrices can

be checked with Boxs M test and of variance with
Levenes statistic.
 Research Questions
Are there differences among three fathers
education groups on a linear combination of
grades, math achievement, and visualization test?

Are there differences between groups on any of

these variables separately? Which ones?

Use hsbdataNEW.sav file to analyze the data.

 Step 1: Before we answer the question,
we will correlate the DVs to see if they are moderately
correlated.
 Output 11.1a (p. 235)
Intercorrelations of the Independent Variables

The 3 circled correlations

should be low to moderate.
MANOVA Steps
 Output 11.1b (pp. 236-237).

Here the largest cell (38) > than 1.5

times the smallest (16). Boxs test
indicates that this assumption is not
violated.
This checks the assumption of
homogeneity of covariances across
groups. There are no significant
differences between covariance
matrices, so assumption is not
violated (p = .147)
Interpretation of Output 11.1b (p. 238).

This is the MANOVA using the Wilks lambda test.

Interpretation of Output 11.1b contd

Because this is significant, we know that the assumption of homogeneity of

variances is violated for math achievement. We could choose to transform
this variable to enable it to meet the assumption. Since the Box test is not
significant and this is the only Levene test that is barely significant, we will
opt to conduct the analysis with corrected follow-up tests.
 Interpretation of Output 11.1b
continued (p. 240).

Each of the variables in brackets under Parameter comprises a dummy variable

devised to distinguish one group from the others.
 Example of How to Write Output for Output 11.1

Results
A multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to assess if there were differences between the
three fathers education groups on a linear combination of grades in H.S., math achievement, and
visualization test. (The assumptions of independence of observations and homogeneity of
variance/covariance were checked and met. Bivariate scatterplots were checked for multivariate
normality.) A statistically significant difference was found, Wilks = .777, F(6, 136) = 3.04, p =
.008, multivariate 2 = .12. Examination of the coefficients for the linear combinations
distinguishing fathers education groups indicated that grades in H.S. and math achievement
contributed most to distinguishing the groups. In particular, both grades in H.S. ( = -1.18, p =
.006, multivariate 2 = .10) and math achievement ( = -6.26, p < .001, multivariate 2 = .17)
contributed statistically significant toward discriminating group 1 (H.S. grad or less) from the other
2 groups, but no variables statistically significantly contributed to distinguishing group 2 (some
college) from the other two groups. Visualization did not contribute statistically significantly to
distinguishing any of the groups. Follow-up univariate ANOVAs indicated that both math
achievement and grades in high school, when examined alone. Were statistically significantly
different for children of fathers with different degrees of education, F(2,70) = 7.88, p = .001 and
F(2,70) = 4.09, p = .021, respectively. Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations, and
Table 2 displays the follow-up ANOVAs related to the effects of fathers education groups on both
grades in high school and math achievement were both statistically significant for math
achievement and visualization.
 Results in APA Format
Table 1

Means and Standard Deviations for Grades in High School, Math Achievement Test, and
Visualization Test as a Function of the Three Fathers Education Groups
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__

Fathers Education Rev Grades Math Achievement Visualization Test

N M SD M SD M SD

HS Grad or Less 38 5.34 1.48 10.09 5.61 4.67 3.96

Some College 16 5.56 1.79 14.40 4.67 6.02 4.56

BS or More 19 6.53 1.22 16.53 7.41 5.46 2.79

Total 73 5.70 1.55 12.66 6.50 5.17 3.83

______________________________________________________________________________________
_________
 Results
Table 2

Univariate Effects of Fathers Education Revised on Grades, Math Achievement Test, and
Visualization Test
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Variable DV df F p 2
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Corrected Model Grades 2 4.09 .021 .32

Math Achieve 2 7.88 .001 .43
Visual Test 2 .76 .470 .14

Intercept Grades 1 968.67 .000 .97

Math Achieve 1 332.70 .000 .91
Visual Test 1 124.97 .000 .80

FaedRevis Grades 2 4.09 .021 .32

Math Achieve 2 7.88 .001 .43
Visual Test 2 .76 .470 .46

Error Grades 70
Math Achieve 70
Visual Test 70
_________________________________________________________________________
______
 Reference
Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2015).
IBM SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and
interpretation (5th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.