Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 45

# PSYC2010

## Lecture 7 – ANOVA: Effect size, models, and RM

Nick, n.bland@uq.edu.au
Assignment (20%)
Scenario/dataset now available on Blackboard
- Due Oct. 2nd, 11:55pm

- Omnibus F

## Follow-up Tests Lecture 6 / Tutorial 5

- Bonferroni correction
- Families of linear contrasts
- Orthogonality ω2 - today
2
Assignment (20%)
Assignment marked out of 60
- Must be completed to pass the course

## Submit electronically via Blackboard/turnitin

- Late submissions lose 3 marks per day
- Equivalent to 1% of course grade
- Guidelines for extensions in ECP, section 5.3

3
Today’s Lecture

## Relationship between t and F

Effect size in ANOVA
Statistical models for ANOVA
Assumptions of ANOVA
Repeated measures (RM) ANOVA

4
Key Questions

How is F related to t?
How do interpret eta and omega squared?
repeated measures?
How does the partitioning of variance differ between
RM and IG ANOVA?
What are the structural models underlying RM and IG
ANOVA?

5
F and t2

## For follow-up tests, dfcontrast = 1 (which is why both

methods were shown in tutorials to be equivalent)

6
α = .05, df = 1,18
F and t2 α = .05, df = 18

2 F = 4.41 = t2
F crit. = t crit.
t2 = 2.101×2.101
7
Effect sizes

## An attempt to assess the importance of an IV in

explaining variance observed in the DV

## A low p-value only tells us that the observed effect is

beyond what we would expect by chance…
- But is the effect worth talking about?
- How much variability is actually explained?

8
Effect sizes
Psychological intervention
(CBT, ACT, control) and
For independent groups ANOVA anxiety management

Source SS df MS F
Treatment 94.533 2 47.267 10.662
Error 53.200 12 4.433
Total 147.733 14

## Eta (η) squared – Descriptive (and biased)

2 SSTREATMENT 94.533
η = 2
η = =.6399
SSTOTAL 147.733

## 64% of the total variability was accounted for by treatment

9
Effect sizes
Psychological intervention
(CBT, ACT, control) and
For independent groups ANOVA anxiety management

Source SS df MS F
Treatment 94.533 2 47.267 10.662
Error 53.200 12 4.433
Total 147.733 14

## Omega (ω) squared – Inferential (less biased)

2SSTREATMENT − (k −1)MS ERROR 94.533− 2 × 4.433
ω = = = .5630
SSTOTAL + MS ERROR 147.733+ 4.433

10
Effect sizes

## ω2 generally preferred, since it attempts to estimate

the population effect size (i.e., is inferential)
- More conservative than η2 (64% versus 54%)

## Can use Cohen’s (1977) conventions

- Small (.01), medium (.06), and large (.15)

11
Statistical models

## For independent groups ANOVA, each score is

structured as the sum of 3 components:

score for
person i in
X ij = µ + τ j + ε ij
condition j
mu tau epsilon
population/ treatment error for
grand mean effect for person i in
condition j condition j
12
Statistical models
Conan, Xij = 1.69 + .06 + .18 = 1.93m

ε ij

## µ Average adult = 1.69m

13
Statistical models
X ij = µ + τ j + ε ij
When we perform the IG ANOVA, we estimate all of
these parameters:

score for X ij = X . + ( X j − X .) + ( X ij − X j )
person i in
condition j
grand mean treatment error for
effect for person i in
condition j condition j
14
Statistical models

## For example, datapoint X72 ‘James’

DV = positive mood
•  Xij
Diet 1: restrict fat Diet 2: restrict Diet 3: no
•  X72 carbs restrictions
•  i = 7
•  j = 2 7 10 12
9 13 11
•  7th person in 8 9 15
2nd condition 12 11 7
8 5 14
7 9 10
•  Xij = 8 4 8 12
10 10 12
•  X̄j = 9 9 8 13
6 7 14
•  X̄. = 9.67
Xj 8 9 12

X . = 9.67 15
Statistical models

## For example, datapoint X72 ‘James’

•  Xij
•  X72 X ij = X . + ( X j − X .) + ( X ij − X j )
•  i = 7
•  j = 2
•  7th person in X 72 = 9.67 + (9 − 9.67) + (8 − 9)
2nd condition

•  Xij = 8 X 72 = 8
•  X̄j = 9
•  X̄. = 9.67 X ij = µ + τ j + ε ij

16
Assumptions

## Three assumptions for independent groups ANOVA:

- Independence of observations
- Normality of the residuals (i.e., ε)
- Put simply, treatment populations are normal
- Homogeneity of variance across treatment populations
- Also called homoscedasticity

Assumptions

## - Normality of the residuals (i.e., ε)

- Okay if only approximate, or even just symmetric

## - Homogeneity of variance across treatment populations

- Okay if only approximate, provided roughly equal n
- Largest no more than “four times” the smallest

18
Data type?

## Question about One variable: Two variables:

Hypothesis testing: differences
relationship Chi-squared Chi-squared
goodness of test of
fit independence
Single sample
compared to Comparison between groups
population

If pop. If only Two Groups Multiple Groups Form of relationship Degree of relationship
variance pop. mean
known: known:
z-test t-test

linear Pearson’s
regression correlation &
point biserial
power correlation

## Dependent Independent Dependent

Independent
Groups: Groups: Groups:
Groups:
Matched Independent Repeated- Multiple Comparisons Spearman’s
One-way
samples groups measures rho
ANOVA
t-test t-test ANOVA

A priori
Wilcoxon’s Wilcoxon’s (planned): Post hoc: = parametric
Signed Ranks Rank Sum Friedman Kruskal-Wallis Bonferroni t Tukey test tests
test test & Linear Scheffe Test = non-parametric
Contrasts tests
RM ANOVA

## Repeated measures (within-subjects) ANOVA

- Each participant exposed to all conditions
- Can capture consistencies within participants

## - Reduces unexplained (error) variance bigger F

20
RM vs IG ANOVA
For IG ANOVA:
SStotal
The total variability in the data

SStreatment SSerror
The variability attributable to The residual (unexplained) variance
the conditions Includes individual differences

21
RM vs IG ANOVA
For RM ANOVA:
SStotal
The total variability in the data

SStreatment SSwithin
The variability attributable to The residual (unexplained) variance
the conditions Includes individual differences

SSerror SSparticipants
The residual Individual differences
(unexplained) variance
22
RM ANOVA

## Let’s say a researcher is interested in the effect of

room temperature on problem-solving ability:
- IV: room temperature (three levels)
- 15°C, 25°C, and 35°C
- DV: problem solving
- number of problems solved
- 5 participants
- Each participant exposed to all temperatures

23
RM ANOVA
Some participants are
naturally better problem-
Raw scores: solvers, irrespective of
temperature!
Temperature (°C)
Participant 15 25 35
1 0 4 1 1.667

participant
2 1 3 2 2.000

averages
3 3 6 2 3.667
4 1 3 0 1.333
5 0 4 0 1.333
1 4 1

## means across conditions

24
RM ANOVA
variability within conditions is either due to
Raw scores: experimental errors or individual differences
Temperature (°C)
Participant 15 25 35
1 0 4 1
2 1 3 2
consistencies across
conditions (i.e., within
3 3 6 2 participants) therefore
reflects individual
4 1 3 0 differences
5 0 4 0

## variability between conditions is either due to

experimental errors or treatment differences
25
Partitioning Variance
SSTOTAL is unchanged SSTOTAL = ∑ ( X − X .) 2
7

6
Problems Solved

2
Grand
Mean
1

0
15 25 35

Temperature (Celsius)
26
Partitioning Variance
SSTREATMENT is unchanged SSTREATMENT = ∑ nk ( X k − X .) 2
7

6
Problems Solved

2
Grand
Mean
1

0
15 25 35

Temperature (Celsius)
27
Partitioning Variance
SSPARTICIPANTS is new SS PARTICIPANTS = ∑ ni ( X i − X .) 2
7

6
Problems Solved

4
P3
3

2
Grand
P1 Mean
1

0
15 25 35

Temperature (Celsius)
28
Partitioning Variance

For IG ANOVA:

For RM ANOVA:

## SSERROR = SSTOTAL − SSTREATMENT − SSPARTICIPANTS

29
Statistical models

## For repeated measures ANOVA, each score is

structured as the sum of 4 components:
score for
person i in X ij = µ + τ j + π i + εij
condition j

mu tau pi epsilon
population/ treatment participant error for
grand mean effect for effect for person i in
condition j person i condition j
30
RM ANOVA

## Raw scores: SSTOTAL = ∑ ( X − X .) 2

Temperature (°C)
Participant 15 25 35
1 0 4 1
2 1 3 2
3 3 6 2
4 1 3 0
5 0 4 0
Σ 5 20 5 30 Grand mean
nk 5 5 5 15 2.000

31
RM ANOVA

SSTOTAL = ∑ ( X − X .) 2
(Xij – Grand Mean)2
Participant 15 25 35
1 4 4 1
2 1 1 0
3 1 16 0
4 1 1 4
5 4 4 4
Σ 11 26 9 46 SSTOTAL
46.000

32
RM ANOVA

## Raw scores: SSTREATMENT = ∑ nk ( X k − X .) 2

Temperature (°C)
Participant 15 25 35
1 0 4 1
2 1 3 2
3 3 6 2
4 1 3 0
5 0 4 0
Group Mean 1 4 1 Grand mean
2.000

33
RM ANOVA

SSTREATMENT = ∑ nk ( X k − X .) 2
(Group Mean – Grand Mean)2
Participant 15 25 35
1 1 4 1
2 1 4 1
3 1 4 1
4 1 4 1
5 1 4 1
Σ 5 20 5 30 SSTREATMENT
30.000

34
RM ANOVA

## Raw scores: SS PARTICIPANTS = ∑ ni ( X i − X .) 2

Temperature (°C)
Participant 15 25 35 Participant Mean
1 0 4 1 1.667
2 1 3 2 2.000
3 3 6 2 3.667
4 1 3 0 1.333
5 0 4 0 1.333
Grand mean
2.000

35
RM ANOVA

SS PARTICIPANTS = ∑ ni ( X i − X .) 2
(Participant Mean – Grand Mean)2
Participant 15 25 35 Σ
1 0.111 0.111 0.111 0.333
2 0 0 0 0
3 2.778 2.778 2.778 8.333
4 0.444 0.444 0.444 1.333
5 0.444 0.444 0.444 1.333
SSPARTICIPANTS
11.333

36
RM ANOVA

Remember,

## SSERROR = 46.000 − 30.000 − 11.333

SSERROR = 4.667

37
RM ANOVA
Source SS df MS F
Participants n–1
Treatment k–1
Error (n – 1)(k – 1)
Total N–1

Source SS df MS F
Participants 11.333 4
Treatment 30.000 2 15.000 24.714
Error 4.667 8 0.583
Total 46.000 14

38
RM ANOVA

Fobt = 24.714

dftreatment = 2
dferror = 8

Fcrit = 4.46

39
RM ANOVA
Fobt = 24.714 > Fcrit = 4.46, so reject null

## A repeated measures ANOVA revealed

that room temperature (15°C, 25°C, and
35°C) significantly impacted problem
solving ability, F(2, 8) = 24.42, p < .05.

## Follow-up tests would then be needed to

know which conditions differed
significantly…
40
RM vs IG ANOVA
What if these same scores had come from an
independent groups design?
RM ANOVA:
Source SS df MS F
dftreatment = 2
Participants 11.333 4
Treatment 30.000 2 15.000 24.714 dferror = 8
Error 4.667 8 0.583
Total 46.000 14 Fcrit = 4.46
IG ANOVA:
Source SS df MS F dftreatment = 2
Treatment 30.000 2 15.000 11.250
Error 16.000 12 1.333
dferror = 12
Total 46.000 14
Fcrit = 3.89
41
RM vs IG ANOVA
IDENTICAL

## RM has bigger Fcrit but much bigger Fobt

RM ANOVA:
Source SS df MS F
dftreatment = 2
Participants 11.333 4
Treatment 30.000 2 15.000 24.714 dferror = 8
Error 4.667 8 0.583
Total 46.000 14 Fcrit = 4.46
IG ANOVA:
Source SS df MS F dftreatment = 2
Treatment 30.000 2 15.000 11.250
Error 16.000 12 1.333
dferror = 12
Total 46.000 14
Fcrit = 3.89
42
RM vs IG ANOVA

## RM generally more powerful

- Smaller error term (less unexplained variance)
- However, fewer df error results in larger Fcrit

## RM vulnerable to carryover effects

- e.g., problem solving may improve dramatically
- previous conditions (e.g., drug)

43
Assumptions Less important
than for IG
ANOVA

## Three assumptions for repeated measures ANOVA:

- Normality
- Normality of differences is more important
- Homogeneity of variances
- Again, what matters most are the differences
- Homogeneity of covariances
- Difference scores have equal variances
- Also known as sphericity

44
Next week…

Factorial ANOVA
- Two or more IVs (i.e., no longer ‘one-way’)

## Non-parametric alternatives for t-tests

- Wilcoxon’s rank-sum test (independent)
- Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test (paired)

45