Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Scroll To Browse The Document.: Click On The Desired Subsection Below To Position To That Page. You May Also
Scroll To Browse The Document.: Click On The Desired Subsection Below To Position To That Page. You May Also
Scroll To Browse The Document.: Click On The Desired Subsection Below To Position To That Page. You May Also
SUPPLEMENTAL
TOPIC 4
S4-1
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-2
Two-Way Analysis
Chapter
of Title
Variance
In Chapter 16, we learned how to compare means of three or more groups using analy-
sis of variance. Now we learn how to compare means for a continuous variable when
individuals are grouped by combinations of two categorical variables. The procedure is
called two-way analysis of variance.
Chapter opeing quote (8pts b/r to box end, 36pts to ch op text)
I
n Chapter 16, we introduced two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and
described some of the relevant ideas. However, we did not furnish de-
tails about the models and analyses. In this chapter, we provide some
of those details.
Example S4.1 Sleep Hours Based on Gender and Seat Location In Exercise 16.31, we
showed the relationship between responses to the survey question hours of
sleep the previous night (continuous) and the two categorical explanatory
variables gender and seat location (using the UCDavis1 dataset on the CD).
Throughout the chapter, this icon Figure S4.1 shows the mean responses to the question How many hours did
introduces a list of resources on the you sleep last night? categorized by gender and preferred seat location. Notice
StatisticsNow website at http://
1pass.thomson.com that will: that the mean hours of sleep for students in the front of the class differ consid-
Help you evaluate your knowledge erably for males and females, with females reporting more than a full hour more
of the material sleep than males. The differences between males and females are smaller for
Allow you to take an exam- those who prefer the middle and back of the class, but there are still differences.
prep quiz
Provide a Personalized Learning Questions of interest include the following:
Plan targeting resources that Is there an overall difference in mean hours of sleep for males and
address areas you should study
females?
S4-2
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-3
Are there overall differences in mean hours of sleep for those who prefer
to sit in the front, middle, and back of the class?
Is there an interaction between gender and seat location, so that the dif-
ference in mean hours of sleep for males and for females changes on the
basis of seat location preference? This certainly appears to be the case,
but the question of interest is about the population these students repre-
sent, and the difference observed in the sample data may or may not
reect a real difference in the population.
7.2 Female
6.2
terested in comparing the mean hours of sleep for the ab 6 populations de-
ned by the combinations of the two explanatory variables.
The comparisons in two-way ANOVA are more complicated than those
made in one-way ANOVA, but the assumptions are not. Here are the assump-
tions about the populations and the samples representing them, repeated from
Section 16.1:
The samples are independent random samples.
The distribution of the response variable is a normal curve within each
population.
The different populations may have different means.
All populations have the same standard deviation, s.
As in Chapter 16, these assumptions may be relaxed somewhat in practice. For
instance, it is rarely the case that all of the population standard deviations are
identical. As long as they are similar, the procedures will work. Similarly, the as-
sumption of normal curves can be relaxed if the sample sizes are moderate and
the samples dont have major outliers. The assumption about independent ran-
dom samples is stricter than is usual in practice. In general, separate represen-
tative samples or one combined sample that can be split into separate samples
using the two categorical variables will sufce.
definition Let xij be the notation for observation j from population i, where i 1, 2, . . . , k
and j 1, 2, . . . , ni. The one-way ANOVA model is
xij mi Pij
where the collection of Pij are independent normal random variables with mean
0 and standard deviation s.
This one-way ANOVA model is less complicated than it might appear. It says
that each observation can be thought of as being made up of the population
mean and an additional term that may be positive or negative. For instance,
suppose a womans height is 67 and she belongs to a population of women
whose mean height is 65. Then her height can be written as 67 65 2. In
the format of the one-way ANOVA, her height would be written as 67 xij
mi Pij 65 2. Another womans height might be 64, in which case for her,
Pij 1. As in the regression model, P is sometimes called the error term, which
is a misnomer because the amount by which an individual differs from the
population mean is certainly not an error in most cases.
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-5
If we were simply to study the general two-way ANOVA model, it would pro-
vide no more information than the one-way model. They are identical except
for the additional subscript required for the notation in the general two-way
model. What makes the two-way ANOVA situation more useful is that we break
up the population mean into pieces. There are four pieces: the overall mean m. .
and an adjustment for each of Factor A, Factor B, and the possible interaction
between Factor A and Factor B. Before introducing notation for these pieces,
lets consider a simple example.
Example S4.2 Pulse Rates, Gender, and Smoking How are resting pulse rates different for
males and females? Does it depend on whether people smoke? On the basis of
data collected in various statistics classes, the following are reasonable guesses
for the population mean pulse rates, in beats per minute, for male and female
Watch a video example at http:// smokers and nonsmokers.
1pass.thomson.com or on your CD.
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-7
Notice that the average of 71 for male pulse rates is 3 beats lower than the
overall mean of 74, and the average for females is 3 beats higher than the over-
all mean. Also, the mean of 76 for smokers is 2 beats above the overall mean
of 74, and for nonsmokers it is 2 beats below the overall mean. Thus we might
think we can dene the mean for male smokers as overall mean of 74 beats
3 beats (for males) 2 beats (for smokers) 73 beats. But notice that in fact the
mean for male smokers isnt completely explained by adding those compo-
nents. The mean is 72 beats, one beat less than the added components pro-
duced. The additional 1 is due to the interaction effect. Even after accounting
for the fact that males have lower pulse rates and smokers have higher pulse
rates, an adjustment was needed for the combination of male and smoker.
Trying to describe the individual means using only the overall mean and
a contribution for each factor is called the additive model. Including an inter-
action term produces the full model. If the additive model describes the data
almost as well as the full model, then there is little or no interaction between the
two factors in their relationship to the response variable.
It is easy to show by using algebra that the sum of the ai 0, the sum of the
bj 0, and, for each xed value of i, the sum over j of abij 0. Similarly, for each
xed value of j, the sum over i of abij 0.
The additive model and full model can be written for individual observa-
tions as well by replacing the mean mij in the general two-way ANOVA model
with the additive or full model version. The full model for each observation in
two-way ANOVA is
xijk mij Pijk m.. ai bj abij Pijk
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-8
where the Pijk are independent normal random variables with mean 0 and stan-
dard deviation s. The additive model for each observation is
xijk mij Pijk m. . ai bj Pijk
where the Pijk are independent normal random variables with mean 0 and stan-
dard deviation s.
E x a m p l e S 4 . 2 (cont.) Models for Pulse Rates Lets nd the main effects and the interaction terms
for the mean pulse rates in Example S4.2. The main effects for Factor A are
a1 m1 . m. . 71 74 3 for males
a2 m2 . m. . 77 74 3 for females
The main effects for Factor B are
b1 m. 1 m. . 76 74 2 for smokers
b2 m. 2 m. . 72 74 2 for nonsmokers
Notice that in both cases, the sum of the main effects across the levels of the fac-
tor is 0. This makes sense both intuitively and algebraically based on the de-
nition of the main effects. These values represent the amount by which each
mean differs from the overall mean, either as a positive or a negative amount.
These main effects tell us that, averaged over smoking behaviors, males
have an average pulse rate that is about 3 beats lower than the overall average,
whereas females have an average pulse rate about 3 beats higher. Similarly,
smokers have average pulse rates that are about 2 beats higher than the overall
average, and nonsmokers have an average pulse rate that is about 2 beats lower.
As was noted in Example S4.2, the additive model is not adequate to de-
scribe the individual population means. For instance, using the additive model
for male smokers would result in m11 m. . a1 b1 74 3 2 73, which is
not correct because m11 72. The remainder is the interaction effect. The inter-
action effect for male smokers is
ab11 m11 1 m. . ai bj 2 72 73 1
You can verify that ab12 ab21 1 and ab22 1. In fact, the interaction ef-
fects must sum to 0 over each row and column.
Figure S4.2 displays an interaction plot for this situation, as described in
Chapter 16. If there were no interaction effect, the lines would be parallel. No-
80
Mean pulse rate
Female
75
Male
70
tice that the lines do not cross, but they are not parallel either. The plot indi-
cates an interaction between gender and smoking behavior in their relationship
with pulse rate. This can be seen by noticing that the difference between the
means for males and females is larger for smokers than it is for nonsmokers.
In fact, there are multiple approaches for testing the hypotheses in two-way
ANOVA with an unbalanced design, and there is some debate about which ap-
proach is best. The details are beyond the scope of this book, and we will simply
use the most common approach.
These estimates are used to allocate the variability among the sample means
to sources for the two factors and interaction. Using two-way ANOVA notation,
SS Groups, which measures the variability among the sample means, is written
as follows:
SS Groups n a a 1xij x. . 2 2
i j
The summand, which is the amount by which the sample mean for group ij dif-
fers from the overall sample mean, can be rewritten by adding together a con-
tribution for each factor and for interaction:
1xij x. . 2 1xi . x. . 2 1x. j x. . 2 3 1xij 1 m ai bj 2 4 ai bj 1
ab 2 ij
If the group mean and overall sample mean are equal, then this summand
will be 0. This could happen if all three of the contributions on the right are 0 or
if they somehow cancel each other out. If the latter is the case, then when the
terms are squared to form sums of squares, it will become evident that they are
not all 0.
The SS Groups can be rewritten as follows, using the above formulation for
the summand and some algebra.
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-12
Notice that SSA is dened as the sum of the squares of the individual estimated
Factor A terms, and similarly for SSB and SSAB. The sum is actually taken over
all nab individual observations, but because the term is the same for all nb in-
dividuals at level i, the sum over the subscripts j and k is summarized in the
multiple nb. A similar simplication occurs for SSB and SSAB.
The degrees of freedom can be divided in a similar way. The technical details
are beyond the level of discussion here, but the results are as follows:
Degrees of Sum of
Source Freedom Squares Mean Square F
Factor A a1 SSA MSA SSA>(a 1) MSA>MSE
Factor B b1 SSB MSB SSB>(b 1) MSB>MSE
AB interaction (a 1)(b 1) SSAB MSAB SSAB>(a 1)(b 1) MSAB>MSE
Error N ab SSE MSE SSE>(N ab)
Total N1 SSTO
and the numerator is the MS for A, B, or AB. Table S4.1 summarizes the relevant
information and is called a two-way analysis of variance table. In practice, the
formulas in the table are replaced with their numerical values, and the terms
Factor A and Factor B are replaced by descriptive names for the variables that
they represent.
In each case, test the hypotheses about the effect (A, B, AB) using the corre-
sponding F-test statistic. Computer software will provide p-values, or Table A.4
in the Appendix can be used to nd the critical values for a .05 or .01. (Note
that we are using the symbol a here to represent the signicance level as we have
throughout the book, not in the two-way ANOVA context of a Factor A effect. The
distinction should be clear from the context.) In each case, the denominator de-
grees of freedom (N ab), corresponding to MSE, and the numerator degrees
of freedom are found from the appropriate row of the ANOVA table. The details
of the hypotheses, test statistics, and p-values are shown in Table S4.2.
Example S4.3 Nature Versus Nurture in IQ Scores Are the IQs of children related to the
socioeconomic status (SES) of their parents? If children are adopted, are their
IQs related to the SES of their biological parents, their adoptive parents, or some
combination? These are the questions that French researchers set out to in-
vestigate in a study. They identied children from adoption registers in France
whose biological and adoptive parents were from the highest and the lowest
SES categories. SES was determined by occupation and years of education. Fac-
tor A is the SES of the adoptive parents (high, low), and Factor B is the SES of
the biological parents (high, low). The researchers attempted to create a bal-
anced design with ten children for all groups but found only eight for the com-
bination with high SES for biological parents but low SES for the adoptive par-
ents. The IQs and categories for the 38 children are shown in Table S4.3. (Source:
Data reported in Ramsey and Schafer, 1997, p. 396; adapted from Capron and
Duyme, 1991.)
The null hypotheses for this example can be written in context as follows:
For Factor A (adoptive parents SES):
H0: The mean IQs for the populations of children with high-SES and low-SES
adoptive parents are equal.
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-15
110
100
Adoptive parents SES = Low
High Low
SES of biological parents
The plot also indicates that both main effects are present. The gap between
the lines for low and high adoptive parents SES indicates that the means for the
two levels of Factor A differ (by the amount shown by the gap, about 12 points).
The slope of the lines indicates that the means for the two levels of Factor B dif-
fer. Notice that for both lines, the mean IQ for children of high-SES biological
parents is about 16 points higher than the mean IQ for children of low-SES bio-
logical parents.
The individual means, analysis of variance table, and other results produced
by Minitab for this example are shown in Figure S4.4. The two different SS col-
umns, Seq SS and Adj SS, represent two methods for analyzing an unbal-
anced design. The results are based on the Adj SS, as is common practice.
When the design is not balanced, the three hypothesis tests of interest are not
independent. The Adj SS method tests for each effect after adjusting for the
presence of the other effects. The Seq SS method tests the effects in order,
starting with Factor A; thus, the results depend on which factor is designated as
A and which is designated as B.
The p-value for the test of the Factor A effect is .011, so the null hypothesis
can be rejected. Remember that the null hypothesis for Factor A stated that the
population mean IQs are equal for children of high-SES and low-SES adoptive
parents. This is clearly not the case. In fact, the sample means for the children
of high- and low-SES adoptive parents are 111.60 and 99.11, respectively, a dif-
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-16
ference of over 12 IQ points. The p-value conrms that the difference seen in
the sample results reects a real difference in the population means.
The p-value for the test of Factor B effect is .001, so the null hypothesis can
be rejected. The null hypothesis for Factor B stated that the population mean
IQs are equal for children of high-SES and low-SES biological parents. This is
also clearly not true; the sample means are 114.22 and 98.00, respectively, and
the low p-value conrms that the difference in the sample means reects a real
difference in the population means.
The p-value for the test of AB interaction is .917, so the null hypothesis can-
not be rejected. Consistent with the interaction plot, this p-value conrms that
the difference in mean IQs for the levels of one factor does not depend much on
the level of the other factor.
In summary, the mean IQs of children are related to the SES of both their
biological and adoptive parents. Children whose adoptive parents have high
SES have average IQs that are about 6.6 points higher than the overall average,
and children whose biological parents have high SES have average IQs that are
about 7.7 points higher than the overall average. The combined effect is addi-
tive, so children for whom both sets of parents have high SES have average IQs
that are about 14 points above the overall average. This can be seen in Figure
S4.4; the mean for the children with high SES for both sets of parents is 119.6,
whereas the overall mean is 105.68.
Example S4.4 Happy Faces and Restaurant Tips Revisited In Chapter 16, we presented
an example in which a male server and a female server in a restaurant drew a
happy face on some checks presented to customers and not on others, ran-
domly determined. The percent tip accompanying each check was recorded.
The researcher was interested in knowing whether the happy face would in-
crease or decrease the tip percentage and if it depended on whether the server
was male or female. One shortcoming of the study was that only one server
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-17
of each sex was used, so the results may apply to those two servers only. None-
theless, it is a useful example for illustrating a somewhat unusual situation.
There is a signicant interaction effect, but only one of the main effects was
signicant.
The response variable for this example is tip percent. Factor A is the message
on the check, with level 1 none and level 2 happy face. Factor B is sex, with
level 1 female and level 2 male.
Figure S4.5, reprinted from Chapter 16, shows the interaction plot. Notice
that the lines are not parallel. For the female, tips were higher with the happy
face message, whereas for the male, tips were lower with the happy face mes-
sage. This difference indicates that there is an interaction effect. The plot also
demonstrates that there is a sex effect. Overall, the mean tip for the female is
much higher than that for the male. However, it appears from the plot that there
is not a message effect. Notice that the mean tip percentage for no message is
about the same as the mean tip percentage for the happy face message when
averaged across the two sexes.
Female
28
23
Male
18
The means and analysis of variance results are shown in Figure S4.6 on the
next page. The numerical results conrm what the plot illustrated. The p-value
for testing for the AB interaction is .049, so the null hypothesis of no inter-
action can be rejected using a .05. The p-value for the Factor B (sex) effect is
.000, indicating a strong difference in average tip percents for the male and fe-
male servers.
However, the p-value for testing for a Factor A effect is .715, so the null hy-
pothesis cannot be rejected. Remember that the null hypothesis for Factor A in
this example is that the population mean tip percentage is the same when no
message is written on the check as when the happy face is written. We have seen
that this is not true for the female, whose tips went up with the happy face, nor
is it true for the male, whose tips went down for the happy face. It is true only
when averaged across them. This illustrates the danger of interpreting a main
effect overall, in the presence of interaction. When interaction is present, it is
very important to examine the means for the different levels of one factor sepa-
rately for the levels of the other factor. In this example, it is important to exam-
ine the difference in means for the two messages separately for the male and the
female.
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-18
Figure S4.6 Means and analysis of variance table for Example S4.4
Example S4.5 Does Smoking Lead to More Errors? This example is adapted from a study
of the relationship between smoking and performance on three types of tasks.
The study was done by Spilich, June, and Renner (1992). Howell (1997, p. 416)
simplied the data for illustrative purposes; the data presented here are a slight
modication based on communication with Professor Howell, who thought
that this adaptation was more similar to the original results.
Participants were asked to perform one of three types of tasks. Factor A is
the type of task performed. The rst type (level 1) is pattern recognition, in
which participants had to locate a target on a computer screen. The second type
(level 2) is a cognitive task involving recall of a passage read earlier. The third
type (level 3) is a driving simulation computer game. For Factor B, participants
were categorized by their smoking behavior. Level 1 is nonsmoker, level 2 is for
smokers who did not smoke within 3 hours of the task, and level 3 is for partici-
pants who were smoking during the task. The response variable is the number
of errors made while performing the task.
The data are presented in Table S4.4. An interaction plot is shown in Fig-
ure S4.7, and analysis of variance results are shown in Figure S4.8. From the in-
Pattern Recognition
Nonsmoker 9, 8, 12, 10, 7, 10, 9, 11, 8, 10, 8, 10, 8, 11, 10
b3 Hours 12, 7, 14, 4, 8, 11, 16, 17, 5, 6, 9, 6, 6, 7, 16
Active Smoker 8, 8, 9, 1, 9, 7, 16, 19, 1, 1, 22, 12, 18, 8, 10
Cognitive Task
Nonsmoker 27, 34, 19, 20, 56, 35, 23, 37, 4, 30, 4, 42, 34, 19, 49
b3 Hours 48, 29, 34, 6, 18, 63, 9, 54, 28, 71, 60, 54, 51, 25, 49
Active Smoker 34, 65, 55, 33, 42, 54, 21, 44, 61, 38, 75, 61, 51, 32, 47
Driving Simulation
Nonsmoker 3, 2, 0, 0, 6, 2, 0, 6, 4, 1, 0, 0, 6, 2, 3
b3 Hours 7, 0, 6, 0, 12, 17, 1, 11, 4, 4, 3, 5, 16, 5, 11
Active Smoker 15, 2, 2, 14, 5, 0, 16, 14, 9, 17, 15, 9, 3, 15, 13
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-19
teraction plot, the most obvious result is that there are many more errors in the
cognitive task than in the other two tasks. Is there an interaction effect? It ap-
pears that the mean number of errors increases as smoking behavior gets more
immediate for the cognitive task and the driving task, but does change much for
the pattern recognition task. If that pattern is statistically signicant, it is inter-
esting because it indicates that smoking is related to performance in memory
(the cognitive task) and in simulated driving, but not in pattern recognition.
The analysis of variance results in Figure S4.8 conrm that there is indeed a
signicant interaction (p-value .023) and that there are signicant Factor A
and Factor B effects. Because of the signicant interaction effect, interpretation
of the differences in factor level means should be done within the levels of the
other factor. Notice that the means shown in Figure S4.8 conrm that for the
sample, the mean number of errors for the pattern recognition task remained
relatively constant across smoking behaviors. The mean number of errors for
the other two tasks was highest for active smokers and lowest for nonsmokers,
with those who had not smoked recently falling between them.
E x a m p l e S 4 . 1 (cont.) Seat Location, Gender, and Hours of Sleep We began our discussion of
two-way ANOVA with an example for which the interaction plot indicated that
there would be a strong interaction as well as main effects. Figure S4.1 showed
the mean hours of sleep for male and female students who prefer to sit in the
front, middle, and back of the class. The ANOVA results for this example are pre-
sented in Figure S4.9. Notice that none of the effects is statistically signicant,
as reected by the p-values, which are all much greater than .05. Why do the
ANOVA results appear to be contradictory to the interaction plot? The answer is
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-20
that there is a large amount of variability in the data. The interaction plot does
not take the standard deviations into account; it is a plot of the means.
If you look at the standard deviations in Figure S4.9, you will see that they
range from about 1.3 hours to 2.0 hours of sleep. The natural variability in sleep
times, reected in the denominator of the F-test through MSE, is so large that
any difference that might exist in the population means cannot be detected
with this sample.
The lesson is that it is not enough to look at either an interaction plot or
an analysis of variance table alone. The combination provides a picture of the
main effects and interactions in the sample, as well as a gauge for whether we
can conclude that they exist in the population from which the sample was
drawn.
Key Terms
Section S4.1 population mean for Factor A, level i, S4-5 Section S4.2
main effect, S4-3, S4-7 population mean for Factor B, level j, S4-5 balanced ANOVA, S4-9
interaction effect, S4-3, S4-7 overall population mean, S4-5 balanced design, S4-9
one-way ANOVA model, S4-4 general two-way ANOVA model, S4-6 unbalanced design, S4-9
factor, S4-5 additive model for two-way ANOVA, two-way analysis of variance table, S4-13
factor A, S4-5 S4-7, S4-8
factor B, S4-5 full model for two-way ANOVA, S4-7
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-21
Exercises
Denotes basic skills exercises S4.4 Draw an interaction plot of these means. Comment
Denotes dataset is available in StatisticsNow at http:// on whether there appear to be effects for Factor A
1pass.thomson.com or on your CD but is not required to (age) and Factor B (coffee-drinking behavior), and
solve the exercise. whether there appears to be an interaction be-
Bold-numbered exercises have answers in the back of the text and
tween them.
fully worked solutions in the Student Solutions Manual.
S4.5 Give numerical values for each of the following:
a. m12
b. m. .
Go to the StatisticsNow website at c. mi . for i 1, 2
http://1pass.thomson.com to: d. m. j for j 1, 2
Assess your understanding of this chapter S4.6 Give numerical values for each of the following:
Check your readiness for an exam by taking the Pre-Test quiz and a. ai for i 1, 2
exploring the resources in the Personalized Learning Plan b. bj for j 1, 2
c. abij for all i, j pairs
S4.1 For each of the following two-way ANOVA situations, S4.7 On the basis of relevant numerical values found in
specify the response variable, the two factors and val- Exercises S4.5 and S4.6, write each of the means mij
ues for a and b, and the number of levels for Factors A using the additive model. Is the additive model ade-
and B, respectively. quate in this situation?
a. One hundred overweight men are classied by S4.8 Write each of the means mij using the full model,
whether they smoke or not. They are randomly as- showing the numerical value of each of the terms in
signed to participate in a swimming program, a jog- the model.
ging program, or a yoga program. Weight loss after S4.9 Explain in words what the table of means indicates in
two months is measured. terms of main effects and interaction in this situation.
b. A random sample of kindergarten children in a Use the following scenario for Exercises S4.10 to S4.14.
certain state is given a reading test. The children A study was done to investigate the effect of the pes-
are categorized by whether they attended preschool ticide DDT in falcons. The response variable was the
(regularly, some, not at all) and whether they have amount of DDT measured in each bird. Factor A was
older siblings at home (yes, no). the nesting site of the bird (1 United States, 2
S4.2 Researchers measure the salaries and years of experi- Canada, 3 Arctic region) and Factor B was the age
ence for a random sample of male and female profes- of the bird (1 Young, 2 Middle-aged, 3 Old).
sors at a university. They want to know whether there The data, means, and analysis of variance table are
is a difference in the mean salaries of males and fe- shown on the next page; the interaction plot is shown
males, adjusted for years of experience. Is this a situa- in the accompanying gure. (Source: Falcon.MTW
tion for which two-way ANOVA is appropriate? If so, dataset in the Student1 Directory of Minitab les.)
specify the response variable and the two factors. If S4.10 Based on the interaction plot, comment on whether
not, explain why not. there appears to be
S4.3 A plant biologist randomly assigns seedlings to one a. A Factor A (nesting site) main effect.
of four conditions: sunlight and drip watering, arti- b. A Factor B (age) main effect.
cial light and drip watering, sunlight and hand water- c. An interaction between the factors.
ing, articial light and hand watering. He measures the S4.11 State the null and alternative hypotheses in the con-
biomass of each plant after three weeks. Is this a sit- text of this problem for
uation for which two-way ANOVA is appropriate? If a. A Factor A effect.
so, specify the response variable and the two factors. If b. A Factor B effect.
not, explain why not. c. An interaction between the factors.
Use the following scenario for Exercises S4.4 to S4.9. S4.12 Conduct and interpret the hypothesis test for this sit-
Suppose that the population mean hours of sleep uation for
for college students, categorized by whether they are a. A Factor A effect.
coffee drinkers and whether they are over 21, are as b. A Factor B effect.
follows: c. An interaction between the factors.
S4.13 Based on examining the sample means and the anal-
ysis of variance table, explain in words
Coffee Drinker?
a. The effect of nesting site on DDT in falcons.
Yes No b. The effect of age on DDT in falcons.
c. In this example, does the interpretation of the ef-
18 21 6.0 8.0
fects of one factor depend on the levels of the other
Over 21 7.0 7.4
factor? Explain why or why not.
Basic skills Dataset available but not required Bold-numbered exercises answered in the back
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-22
Data
92
Rows: Site Columns: Age
82 Arctic
1 2 3 72
1 19 25 34
62
Mean DDT
17 24 37
16 29 36 52
2 16 28 36 42
13 24 39 32
16 26 37 U.S.
22
3 74 82 91 Canada
69 80 88 12
72 80 90
Young Middle Old
Means Age
1 2 3
1 17.333 26.000 35.667
2 15.000 26.000 37.333
3 71.667 80.667 89.667
Two-Way ANOVA
Source DF SS MS F P
Site 2 17785.41 8892.70 2581.75 0.000
Age 2 1721.19 860.59 249.85 0.000
Interaction 4 17.70 4.43 1.28 0.313
Error 18 62.00 3.44
Total 26 19586.30
S4.14 Show numerically how the F-test statistic was created S4.16 Construct an interaction plot for this situation.
for the A, B, and AB interaction tests by plugging in S4.17 State the null and alternative hypotheses in the con-
the appropriate mean squares. text of this problem for
Use the following scenario for Exercises S4.15 to S4.20. a. A Factor A effect.
b. A Factor B effect.
Jennifer lives in the San Francisco Bay Area and c. An interaction between the factors.
drives to work. She has a choice of three routes (Fac- S4.18 Conduct and interpret the hypothesis test for this sit-
tor A) and wants to know whether any of them is uation for
faster than the others. She suspects that it may de- a. A Factor A effect.
pend on whether its Monday, Friday, or a mid-week b. A Factor B effect.
day (Factor B), due to vacationers leaving the area on c. An interaction between the factors.
Fridays and returning on Mondays. She randomly S4.19 Based on examining the sample means and the anal-
chooses which route to take each day until she has ysis of variance table, explain in words
taken each route 10 times for each of Monday, mid- a. Whether there is a signicant difference in com-
week day, and Friday, for a total of 90 measurements mute time for different routes.
(3 routes 3 types of day 10 observations). The b. Whether there is a signicant difference in com-
response variable is commute time. The means are mute times for different days.
shown in the following table. c. In this example, does the interpretation of the ef-
fects of one factor depend on the levels of the other
Monday Mid-week Friday factor? Explain why or why not.
Route 1 34.2 30.8 32.1 S4.20 What route would you recommend that Jennifer take
Route 2 22.7 24.6 26.0 to work? Does it depend on the day of the week?
Route 3 38.6 34.1 32.9 Explain.
S4.21 Explain why an interaction plot may show lines that
are not parallel, or even that cross, yet the analysis
She computes these sums of squares: SSA 1868.9, of variance results show a nonsignicant interaction
SSB 65, SSAB 229.33, SSE 552.8. effect.
S4.15 Construct the analysis of variance table for this
problem.
Basic skills Dataset available but not required Bold-numbered exercises answered in the back
S4-W3527 9/28/05 4:05 PM Page S4-23
S4.22 Fill in the missing values in the following two-way c. The sample size for each group, n.
analysis of variance table, where the letters occupy- d. The overall sample size, N.
ing the space indicate the parts to this exercise. For S4.25 Refer to Exercises S4.22, S4.23, and S4.24. If a one-
instance, for part (a), give the degrees of freedom for way analysis of variance had been done using the
Factor B, and for part (b), give MSA. ab groups, instead of a two-way analysis of variance,
give a numerical value for each of the following:
Analysis of Variance a. SS Groups.
b. SS Error.
Source DF SS MS F c. Degrees of freedom for groups.
Factor A 2 450 b f d. Degrees of freedom for error.
Factor B a 840 c g
Interaction 2 130 d h
Error 48 1050 e Preparing for an exam? Assess your
Total 53 2470 progress by taking the post-test at http://1pass.thomson.com.
Basic skills Dataset available but not required Bold-numbered exercises answered in the back