Literature DB >> 23647492

Controlling the Type I error rate by using the nonparametric bootstrap when comparing means.

Isabel Parra-Frutos1.   

Abstract

Of the several tests for comparing population means, the best known are the ANOVA, Welch, Brown-Forsythe, and James tests. Each performs appropriately only in certain conditions, and none performs well in every setting. Researchers, therefore, have to select the appropriate procedure and run the risk of making a bad selection and, consequently, of erroneous conclusions. It would be desirable to have a test that performs well in any situation and so obviate preliminary analysis of data. We assess and compare several tests for equality of means in a simulation study, including non-parametric bootstrap techniques, finding that the bootstrap ANOVA and bootstrap Brown-Forsythe tests exhibit a similar and exceptionally good behaviour.
© 2013 The British Psychological Society.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23647492     DOI: 10.1111/bmsp.12011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol        ISSN: 0007-1102            Impact factor:   3.380


  3 in total

1.  HIV treatment engagement in the context of COVID-19: an observational global sample of transgender and nonbinary people living with HIV.

Authors:  Arjee Javellana Restar; Henri M Garrison-Desany; Tyler Adamson; Chase Childress; Gregorio Millett; Brooke A Jarrett; Sean Howell; Jennifer L Glick; S Wilson Beckham; Stefan Baral
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 3.295

2.  Better Working Memory and Motor Inhibition in Children Who Delayed Gratification.

Authors:  Junhong Yu; Chi-Ming Kam; Tatia M C Lee
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-07-21

3.  The effect of personal relative deprivation on food choice: An experimental approach.

Authors:  Sofie van Rongen; Michel Handgraaf; Maaike Benoist; Emely de Vet
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.