This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lix, L. M. Articles by Keselman, H. J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

To Trim or Not to Trim: Tests of Location Equality Under Heteroscedasticityand Nonnormality

University of Manitoba

H. J. Keselman

University of Manitoba

Tests of mean equality proposed by Alexander and Govern, Box, Brown and Forsythe, James, and Welch, as well as the analysis of variance F test, were compared for their ability to limit the number of Type I errors and to detect true treatment group differences in one-way, completely randomized designs in which the underlying distributions were nonnormal, variances were nonhomogeneous, and groups sizes were unequal. These tests were compared when the usual method of least squares was applied to estimate group means and variances and when Yuen's trimmed means and Winsorized variances were adopted. Based on the variables examined in this investigation, which included number of treatment groups, degree of population skewness, nature of the pairing of variances and group sizes, and nonnull effects of varying sizes, we recommend that researchers use trimmed means and Winsorized variances with either the Alexander and Govern, James, or Welch tests to test for mean equality.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 58, No. 3, 409-429 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164498058003004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. V. Seco, M. C. Izquierdo, M. P. F. Garcia, and F. J. H. Diez A Comparison of the Bootstrap-F, Improved General Approximation, and Brown-Forsythe Multivariate Approaches in a Mixed Repeated Measures Design Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 2006; 66(1): 35 - 62. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. M. Lix and H. J. Keselman Multivariate Tests of Means in Independent Groups Designs: Effects of Covariance Heterogeneity and Nonnormality Eval Health Prof, March 1, 2004; 27(1): 45 - 69. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Hess, S. Olejnik, and C. J Huberty The Efficacy of two Improvement-Over-Chance Effect Sizes for Two-Group Univariate Comparisons under Variance Heterogeneity and Nonnormality Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2001; 61(6): 909 - 936. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. J. Keselman, J. Algina, R. R. Wilcox, and R. K. Kowa Testing Repeated Measures Hypotheses When Covariance Matrices are Heterogeneous: Revisiting the Robustness of the Welch-James Test Again Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2000; 60(6): 925 - 938. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. J Huberty and L. L. Lowman Group Overlap as a Basis for Effect Size Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2000; 60(4): 543 - 563. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. J. Keselman, C. J. Huberty, L. M. Lix, S. Olejnik, R. A. Cribbie, B. Donahue, R. K. Kowalchuk, L. L. Lowman, M. D. Petoskey, J. C. Keselman, et al. Statistical Practices of Educational Researchers: An Analysis of their ANOVA, MANOVA, and ANCOVA Analyses Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1998; 68(3): 350 - 386. [Abstract] [PDF]