ANOVA Unit - 4 BRM

1|Page Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) by Dr.
Suresh Sir
Introduction:-
Analysis of Variance popularly known as ANOVA is a statistical tool used when multiple sample
cases are involved. If there are two samples, then significance of difference between the means of two
samples can be judged either by applying Z-Test if sample happens to be large or t-Test if sample is
small. If there are more than two populations to for testing the equality of their means the Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) method is applied.
This technique introduced by Prof. R. A. Fisher an Agriculturist who made an extensive use of
this technique in his agriculture experiments. It was originally used in Agricultural experiment in which
different types of fertilizers were applied to plots of Land, different types of feeding methods to animals
and so on.
This method is widely used in different fields:
 To study the pattern of average sales by using different sales techniques.
 The types of drugs manufactured by different companies to cure a particular disease.
 If we want to test the mileage of five automobiles.
 We have to study the playing habit of four groups of university students.
ANOVA technique was later developed by Prof. Suedecar and many other contributed towards the
development of this technique. The main feature of ANOVA technique is that it breaks the total
amount of variation in a set of data into two parts. The amount which can be attributed to change,
forms one part and that amount which can be attributed to specified causes form another part. Also
there may be variation between samples and within samples, items. ANOVA technique helps in
spitting the variance for analytical purpose as
i. Variance between Samples.

ii. Variance within Samples.
Hence ANOVA is a technique which can be used to investigate any number of factors for which
hypothesis is drawn or which are said to influence the dependent variable.
By Looking Picture:
A is the Closest to X, Y is near to X and Z is the most distantly related.
 Small population are part of large one. Totally involved each other/ totally linked.
Note: Mean can be similar to many population but they have variance. In the above diagram mean of
population A is equal to Mean of Population X (Total population). But this is only but observation results
of seeing the diagram. It is not possible in all the cases. Mean can be similar to many population but they
have variance.
Dr. SURESH TALAMALA MBA, Ph.D., M.Com, PGDHRM, MA English Ph: 8985251139 Mail: dr.sureshsony@gmail.com
2|Page Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) by Dr. Suresh Sir
 Small population are so much distantly a part. They are less likely to be the part of the large
population. They related within each other.
 If we extend the small population are related to each other. So they related between each other.
Assumptions in Analysis of Variance:

The Analysis of Variance is based on the following assumptions:
1. The samples are independently (or randomly) drawn from the populations.
2. Populations from which the samples are selected are normally distributed.
3. Each of the populations has the same variance.
If, however, the sample sizes are large enough we do not need the assumptions of normality.
ANOVA Technique can be classified in Two ways
The observations (or data) may be classified according to one factor (or criterion) or two factors.
The classifications according to One – factor and Two – factor are called One – way classification and
Two – way classification respectively.
One - way For one Independent

ANOVA Variable
ANOVA
Two -way For two or more
ANOVA Independent Variable
 One – way Classification:

When we take only one factor and investigate the difference amongst its various categories
having numerous possible values, then it is known as One – way classification.
In One – way classification observations are classified according to one factor. This is exhibited
Column – wise.
 Two – way Classification:

When we study interaction between two independent variables, affecting dependent variable, then
it is known as Two – way classification.
In Two – way classification observations are classified according to Two – factors, one Column –
wise and the other Row – wise.
A Two-way ANOVA is the ANOVA you use when you have two or more independent variables
with multiple conditions. A One – way ANOVA is used when you have one independent variable with
multiple conditions.
For Example:
You would use a One – way ANOVA if you wanted to determine the effects of different types of
fertilizer on the number of fruits your lemon tree produces. Your independent variable is the fertilizer
type.
You would use a Two – way ANOVA if you wanted to determine the effects of different types of
fertilizer and the frequency with which you water the tree on the number of fruits produced. Your two
independent variables are 1) Fertilizer type and 2) frequency tree is watering.
Number of
Independent ANOVA Used Example
Variables
Independent : Fertilizer Type
One One – way ANOVA
Dependent: Fruit Produced
Independent: Fertilizer Type and Frequency watering
Two Two – way ANOVA
Dependent: Fruit Produced
ANOVA for One – way Classification
In the investigation of analysis of variance (ANOVA), if we consider the influence of any one
factor, then it is called One – way classification. For example, yield of several plots of land may be
classified according to one or more types of fertilizers.
The techniques for ANOVA One – way Classification are:
One - way ANOVA

Direct Method
Short - Cut Method
Codeing Method
1. DIRECT METHOD
Let the Null Hypothesis be Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 =………. μk where μ1= μ2 = μ3 =… μk are the
arithmetic means of the k populations from which k samples are drawn at random.
The Alternative Hypothesis is H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 ≠………. μk

The steps in carrying out the analysis are given below:
Step 1: Calculation of Variance Between the Samples.

It is the sum of the squares of the deviations of the means of various samples (or groups) from the
grand mean. To calculate variance between the samples, we proceed, as follows:
i. Calculate the Sample means 1 2 3 …….. k of all the k samples.
ii. Calculate the mean of the sample means or the Grand mean ̿ by using the formula
̿
iii. Evaluate the deviations of the sample means from the Grand mean i.e., find 1
̿ 2 ̿ 3 - ̿ …….. k - ̿
iv. Calculate SSB/ SSC and MSB/MSC:
 SSB (or SSC) = Sum of the Squares of the variations between the Samples (or
Columns) ∑ i
̿)2 (ni is the Size of the ith Sample)
 MSB (or MSC) = Variance or the Mean Square Between the samples (or between the
Columns) where v1 = Degrees of freedom (Degrees of
Freedom (v1) = (No of Samples – 1) = k - 1
 MSB indicates the degree of explained variance due to sampling fluctuations
Step 2: Calculation of Variance Within the Samples:
The variation within the samples would be on account of chance. This is because the same
treatment is given to all items in the sample (the same fertilizer is being used on the sample fields). The
difference in the values of different items in a sample which is due to chance is called an estimate of the
error. It is represented by SSE (Sum of Squares due to Errors).
Variance within the samples is calculated as shown below:
i. Calculate the Sample means 1 2 3 …….. k of all the k samples.
ii. Calculate the deviations of the various items of k samples from the mean values of the
respective samples.
iii. Square these deviations and obtain their total.
Thus,
 SSW (or SSE) = Sum of the Squares of the variations within the samples (or Sum of the squares
due to errors)
= Ʃ (X1 - 1)2 + Ʃ (X2 - 2)2 + Ʃ (X3 - 3)2 +………. Ʃ (Xk - k) 2
 MSW (or MSE) = Variance or Mean Square within the samples

Where, V2 = Degree of Freedom = (Total no. of Observations) – (No. of Samples) = N- k
 MSW indicates the chance variation and it cannot be explained in terms of variation in the
population
Step 3: Calculation of the Test Statistic F
Assuming that H0 is true, the test statistic
F= or =
Follows F- distribution with degree of freedom 1=k – 1 and 2= N–k
In general MSB > MSW But if MSB < MSW, we shall take the inverse ratio i.e. F = i.e,
variance ratio or F is the ratio between the greater variance and smaller variance.
Step 4: Decision
The computed value of F is compared with the critical (Tabulated) value of F for (k -1, N-k)
Degree of Freedom at α % level (may be 5% or 1% level). If the calculated value > the tabulated value,
reject H0 and conclude that all the proportion means are not equal. Otherwise, accept H0 and conclude that
the population means are all equal.
ANOVA Table (One – way Classification)

Source of Sum of Degree of Mean Squares Test Statistic
Variation (SV) Squares (SS) Freedom (MS) (F – Ratio of Variance)
Between Samples
SSB k–1
(Columns)
Within Samples
SSW N-k F=
(Errors)
Total SST N-1 - -
SST = Total Sum of Squares of Variations = SSB + SSW

In the above table SSB and SSW may be replaced by SSC and SSE, and MSB and MSW may be
replaced by MSC and MSE
PROBLEM – 1
1. Three different machines are used for a production. On the basis of the outputs, test whether the
machines are equally effective.
OUTPUTS
Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine 3
10 9 20
5 7 16
11 5 10
10 6 4
Solution:
Let μ1 μ2 μ3 be the population means of production by three machines 1, 2 and 3 respectively.
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e., the machines are equally effective.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e., the machines are not all equally effective.
Analysis of the Degrees of Freedom:
 Degrees of Freedom (d.f) Between Groups = (k – 1) = (3 – 1) = 2 (3 Groups)

 Degree of Freedom (d.f) Within Groups = (N –k) = (12 -3) = 9
Step 1: Calculation of Variance Between the Samples.

The calculations for sample means, the variances between and within the samples are shown
below:
Calculations for Sample Means
Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine 3
(Sample 1) X1 (Sample 2) X2 (Sample 3) X3
10 9 20
5 7 16
11 5 10
10 6 4
ƩX1 = 36 ƩX2 = 27 ƩX3 = 60
Grand Mean ̿ = = 10.25
 SSB = Sum of the Squares between the Samples: ∑ i

̿)2 (ni is the Size of the ith Sample)
(n1 = n2 = n3 = 4)
SSB = 4 (9 – 10.25)2 + 4(6.75 – 10.25)2 + 4(15 – 10.25)2
SSB = 6.25 + 49 + 90.25 = 145.5
 MSB = Mean Square between the Samples: = = 72.75

Degrees of Freedom (d.f) Between Groups = (k – 1) = (3 – 1) = 2
Step 2: Calculation of Variance within the Samples:
Calculations for SSW

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
2 2 2
X1 (X1 - 1) X2 (X2 - 2) X3 (X3 - 3)
10 1 9 5.0625 20 25
5 16 7 0.0625 16 1
11 4 5 3.0625 10 25
10 1 6 0.5625 4 1
2 2 2
Ʃ (X1 - 1) = 22 Ʃ (X2 - 2) = 8.75 Ʃ (X3 - 3) = 52
SSW (or SSE) = Sum of the Squares of the variations within the samples (or Sum of the squares due to
errors) = Ʃ (X1 - 1)2 + Ʃ (X2 - 2)2 + Ʃ (X3 - 3)2
SSW = 22 + 8.75 + 52 = 82.75
MSW (or MSE) = Variance or Mean Square within the samples = = 9.194
Degree of Freedom (d.f) Within Groups = (N –k) = (12 -3) = 9
ANOVA TABLE
Between Samples k–1
145.5
(Columns) 3–1=2
Within Samples N–k
82.75 F= = 7.913
(Errors) 12 – 3 = 9
N -1
Total 228.25 - -
12 – 1 = 11
Conclusion/ Decision:
From the tabular value of F for (9, 2) at 5% level is 4.26. We see that the calculated value 7.913
of F is greater than the tabulated value 4.26. Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and
conclude that the three machines are not equal effective.
2. SHORT CUT METHOD
The above direct method of computing F – ratio is lengthy and time consuming. As such, it is
always advisable to use a short – cut method. This method is based on the sum of the squares of the
individual values is usually used. In this method the computational work is considerably reduced and the
method is more convenient when the sample means and the grand mean are fractions.
The various steps in calculating of F – Ratio by short – cut method are given below:
Step 1: -
Calculate the Total “T” of all the observations in all “k” Samples.
Thus, T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 + …….. ƩXk
Step 2: -
Calculate the correction factor , where N is the total number of items in all samples.
Step 3: -
Compute SST = Total Sum of the Squares of Deviations
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 -

Step 4: -
Find out the sum of Squares between the samples (SSB) as follows:
i. Find the Square of the total of each sample and divide each such squared value by the
number of values of the corresponding sample and then calculate total of all the results
thus obtained.
ii. Subtract the correction factor from (i)
Thus, SSB/SSC = + + +…. -
Step 5: -
Calculate SSW the sum of the squares within the samples by subtracting SSB from SST.
Thus, SSW/SSE = SST - SSB
Step 6: Decision
The computed value of F is compared with the critical (Tabulated) value of F for (k -1, N-k)
Degree of Freedom at α % level (may be 5% or 1% level). If the calculated value > the tabulated value,
reject H0 and conclude that all the proportion means are not equal. Otherwise, accept H0 and conclude that
the population means are all equal.
ANOVA Table (One – way Classification)

Between Samples
SSB/SSC k–1
(Columns)
Within Samples
SSW/SSE N-k F=
(Errors)
Total SST N-1 - -
SST = Total Sum of Squares of Variations = SSB + SSW
In the above table SSB and SSW may be replaced by SSC and SSE, and MSB and MSW may be
replaced by MSC and MSE
PROBLEM – 1
1. Three samples, each of size 5 were drawn from three uncorrelated normal populations with equal
variances. Test the hypothesis that the population means are equal at 5% level.
Sample 1 10 12 9 16 13
Sample 2 9 7 12 11 11
Sample 3 14 11 15 14 16
Solution:
Let μ1 μ2 μ3 be the means of the three populations’ sample 1, sample 2 and sample3 respectively.
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e., three means are equal
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e., three means are not equal.
Calculations for Short – Cut Method

X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
10 100 9 81 14 196
12 144 7 49 11 121
9 81 12 144 15 225
16 256 11 121 14 196
13 169 11 121 16 256
ƩX1= 60 ƩX12= 750 ƩX2= 50 ƩX22= 516 ƩX3= 70 ƩX32= 994
 T = Sum of all the values of the Three samples:
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 60 + 50 + 70 = 180
Correction factor = = 2160 (Here N = 3 × 5 = 15 or No of Observations = 15)
 SST = the Total Sum of Squares:
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 750 + 516 + 994 – 2160 = 100
 SSB/ SSC = Sum of the Squares between the Samples/ Column Sum of Squares:
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + -
(3600 + 2500 + 4900) – 2160 = 2200 – 2160 = 40
10 | P a g e Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) by Dr. Suresh Sir
 Analysis of the Degrees of Freedom:
 MSB/MSC = Mean Square between the samples:
 SSW/ SSE = Sum of the Squares within the samples:
SSW = SST –SSB = 100 – 40 = 60
 MSW/MSE = Mean Square within the samples:
ANOVA TABLE
40
(Columns) 3–1=2
60 F= =4
(Errors) 15 – 3 = 12
N -1
Total 100 - -
15 – 1 = 14
From the tabular value of F for (12, 2) at 5% level is 3.89. We see that the calculated value 4 of F
is greater than the tabulated value 3.89. Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and conclude
that the population means are not equal.
PROBLEM – 2
2. Three samples, each of size 5 were drawn from three uncorrelated normal populations with equal
variances. Test the hypothesis that the population means are equal at 5% level.
Variety of Wheat
Plots of Land
A1 A2 A3
1 6 5 5
2 7 5 4
3 3 3 3
4 8 7 4
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e. The average yield in the 3 varieties of wheat’s are the same
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e. The average yield in the 3 varieties of wheat’s are the
not-same.
2 2
X1 X1 X2 X2 X3 X32
6 36 5 25 5 25
7 49 5 25 4 16
3 9 3 9 3 9
8 64 7 49 4 16
ƩX1= 24 ƩX12= 158 ƩX2= 20 ƩX22= 108 ƩX3= 16 ƩX32= 66
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 24 + 20 + 16 = 60
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 158 + 108 + 66 – 300 = 32
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 144 + 100 + 64 – 300 = 8

 MSB/ MSC = Mean Square between the samples:
SSW = SST –SSB = 32 – 8 = 24
ANOVA TABLE
8
(Columns) 3–1=2
24 F= = 1.8
(Errors) 12 – 3 = 9
N -1
Total 32 - -
12 – 1 = 11
From the tabular value of F for (9, 2) at 5% level is 4.26. We see that the calculated value 1.8 of F
is less than the tabulated value 4.26. Hence, we accept the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and conclude that
the there is no significant difference among the means.
PROBLEM – 3
3. The following table gives the yields of 15 samples of plot under three varieties of seed.
A B C
20 18 25
21 20 28
23 17 22
16 15 28
20 25 22
Test using analysis of variance whether there is a significant difference in the average yield of
seeds.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e. There is no significant difference in the average yields among
the three varieties of seeds.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e. There is significant difference in the average yields
among the three varieties of seeds.

X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
20 400 18 324 25 625
21 441 20 400 28 784
23 529 17 289 22 484
16 256 15 225 28 784
20 400 25 625 22 1024
ƩX1= 100 ƩX12= 2026 ƩX2= 95 ƩX22= 1863 ƩX3= 135 ƩX32= 3701
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 100 + 95 + 135 = 330
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 2026 + 1863 + 3701 – 7260 = 330
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 190
SSW = SST –SSB = 330 – 190 = 140
ANOVA TABLE
190
(Columns) 3–1=2
140 F= = 8.14
(Errors) 15 – 3 = 12
N -1
Total 330 - -
15 – 1 = 14
of F is greater than the tabulated value 3.89. Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and
conclude that the there is significant difference in the average yields among the three varieties of seeds.
PROBLEM – 4
4. Three samples, below have been obtained from normal populations with equal variances. Test the
hypothesis at 5% level that the population means are equal.
8 7 12
10 5 9
7 10 13
14 9 12
11 9 14
The table value of F- at 5% level for V1 = 7 and V2 = 17 is 3.88

Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e. The population means are equal.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e. The population means are not equal.

X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
8 64 7 49 12 144
10 100 5 25 9 81
7 49 10 100 13 169
14 196 9 81 12 144
11 121 9 81 14 196
ƩX1= 50 ƩX12= 530 ƩX2= 40 ƩX22= 336 ƩX3= 60 ƩX32= 734
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 70 + 40 + 60 = 150
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 530 + 336 + 734 – 1500 = 100
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 500 + 320 + 720 – 1500 = 40
SSW = SST –SSB = 100 – 40 = 60
ANOVA TABLE
40
(Columns) 3–1=2
60 F= =4
(Errors) 15 – 3 = 12
N -1
Total 100 - -
15 – 1 = 14
is greater than the tabulated value 3.88. Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and conclude
that the population means are not equal at 5% level.
PROBLEM – 5
5. General Insurance Company wants to test whether three of its salesmen A, B and C in a gives territory
make similar number of appointments with prospective customers during a given period time. A record
of previous four months showed the following results for the number of appointments made by each
salesman for each month.
Salesman
Months
A B C
1 8 6 14
2 9 8 12
3 11 10 18
4 12 4 8
Total 40 28 52
Do you think that at 95% confidence level, there is significant difference in the average number of
appointments made by the three salesmen per month?
Solution:
Let μ1 μ2 μ3 be the means of the three salesmen’ salesmen 1, salesmen 2 and salesmen 3
respectively.
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e. there is no significant difference in the average number of
appointments made by the three salesmen per month.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e. there is significant difference in the average number of
appointments made by the three salesmen per month.

Salesmen 1 Salesmen 2 Salesmen 3
X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
8 64 6 36 14 196
9 81 8 64 12 144
11 121 10 100 18 324
12 144 4 16 8 64
ƩX1= 40 ƩX12= 410 ƩX2= 28 ƩX22= 216 ƩX3= 52 ƩX32= 728
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 40 + 28 + 52 = 120
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 410 + 216 + 728 – 1200 = 154
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 400 + 196 + 676 – 1200 = 72

SSW = SST –SSB = 154 – 72 = 82
ANOVA TABLE
72
(Columns) 3–1=2
82 F= = 3.95
(Errors) 12 – 3 = 9
N -1
Total 100 - -
12– 1 = 11
is less than the tabulated value 4.26. Hence, we accept the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and conclude that
the population means are equal at 5% level i.e. there is no significant difference in the average number of
appointments made by the three salesmen per month
3. CODING METHOD
The Short cut Method becomes tedious when the magnitude of the given values is large. Coding
Method simplifies the calculations involved. As the value of F is the variance ratio, its value does not
change, if all the given values are coded i.e., are either multiplied or divided by a common factor, or if a
common number is either subtracted from or added to each of the given values. By coding the given
values, big figures are reduced in magnitude and work is simplified without altering the value of F.
PROBLEM – 1
1. A manager of a Merchanding firm wishes to test whether its three salesmen A, B, C tend to make sales
of the same size or whether they differ in their selling abilities. During a week there have been 14 sale
calls; A made 5 calls, B made 4 calls and C made 5 calls. Following are the weekly sales record (in Rs)
of the three salesmen:
A 500 400 700 800 600
B 300 700 400 600 -
C 500 300 500 400 300
Perform the analysis of variance and draw your conclusion.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: The three salesmen tend to make sales of the same size.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: The three salesmen differ in their selling abilities.
As the sales data have a common factor 100, we divide the given values by 100. Then the coded data
and the squares are given in the following table:
Calculations for ANOVA

X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
5 25 3 9 5 25
4 16 7 49 3 9
7 49 4 16 5 25
8 64 6 36 4 16
6 36 - - 3 9
ƩX1= 30 ƩX12= 190 ƩX2= 20 ƩX22= 110 ƩX3= 20 ƩX32= 84
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 30 + 20 + 20 = 70
Correction factor = = 350 (Here N = 14)
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 190 + 110 + 84 – 350 = 34
 SSB = Sum of the Squares between the Samples:
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + -
(180 + 100 + 80) – 350 = 360 – 350 = 10

 MSB = Mean Square between the samples:
 SSW = Sum of the Squares within the samples:
SSW = SST –SSB = 34 – 10 = 24
 MSW = Mean Square within the samples:
ANOVA TABLE
10
(Columns) 3–1=2
24 F= = 2.29
(Errors) 14 – 3 = 11
N -1
Total 34 - -
14 – 1 = 13
of F is less than the tabulated value 3.98 at 5% level. Hence, we accept the Null Hypothesis at 5% level
and conclude that the three salesmen tend to make sales of the same size.
PROBLEM – 2
2. Three samples of five, five and four motor car tyres are drawn respectively from three brands A, B and
C manufactured by three machines. The life – time of these tyres (in 1000 miles) is given below. Test
whether the average life – time of the three brands of tyres are equal or not.
A 35 40 33 36 31
B 30 25 34 28 33
C 28 24 30 26 -
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: The Average life – time of three brands of tyres are equal.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: The Average life – time of three brands of tyres are not-equal.
Let us subtract 30 from each of the given values. Then the coded data and the squares are given in
the following table:
Calculations for ANOVA

X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
5 25 0 0 -2 4
10 100 -5 25 -6 36
3 9 4 16 0 0
6 36 -2 4 -4 16
1 1 3 9 - -
ƩX1= 25 ƩX12= 171 ƩX2= 0 ƩX22= 54 ƩX3= -12 ƩX32= 56
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 25 + 0 - 12 = 13
Correction factor = = 12.07 (Here N = 5+5+4 = 14)
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 171 + 54 + 56 – 12.07 = 268.93
 SSB = Sum of the Squares between the Samples:
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + -
(125 + 0 + 36) – 12.07 = 148.93
 MSB = Mean Square between the samples:
 SSW = Sum of the Squares within the samples:
SSW = SST –SSB = 268.93 – 148.93 = 120
 MSW = Mean Square within the samples:
ANOVA TABLE
148.93
(Columns) 3–1=2
120 F= = 6.83
(Errors) 14 – 3 = 11
N -1
Total 268.93 - -
14 – 1 = 13
of F is greater than the tabulated value 3.98 at 5% level. Hence, we reject the Null Hypothesis at 5% level
and conclude that the average life – time of the three brands of tyres are not equal.
PROBLEM – 3
3. There are three main brands of a certain powder. A set of 120 sample values is examined and found to
be allocated among four groups (A, B, C and D) and three brands (I, II and III) as shown here under
Groups
Brands
A B C D
1 0 4 8 15
2 5 8 13 6
3 18 19 11 13
Is there any significant difference in brands preference? Answer at 5% level using One-way
ANOVA.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 i.e. There is no significant difference in brands preference.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 i.e. There is significant difference in brands preference.
Brands
Groups
I II II
A 0 5 18
B 4 8 19
C 8 13 11
D 15 6 13
Subtract 10 from all the items (F- value is not affected by doing this)
Brands
Groups
I II II
A -10 -5 8
B -6 -2 9
C -2 3 1
D 5 -4 3

Brand 1 Brand 2 Brand 3
X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32
-10 100 -5 25 8 64
-6 36 -2 4 9 81
-2 4 3 9 1 1
5 25 -4 16 3 9
ƩX1= -13 ƩX12= 165 ƩX2= -8 ƩX22= 54 ƩX3= 21 ƩX32= 155
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = -13 - 8 + 21 = 0
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 165 + 54 + 155 – 0 = 374
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 168.5

SSW = SST –SSB = 374 – 168.5 = 205.5
ANOVA TABLE
168.5
(Columns) 3–1=2
205.5 F= = 3.69
(Errors) 12 – 3 = 9
N -1
Total 374 - -
12 – 1 = 11
From the tabular value of F for (9, 2) at 5% level is 4.26. We see that the calculated value 3.69 of
F is less than the tabulated value 4.26. Hence, we accept the Null Hypothesis at 5% level and conclude
that the there is no significant difference in brand preference.
ANOVA for Two – Way Classification/ Manifold Classification
In two –way classification, observations (or data) are classified according to two different factors
(or criteria). For example, fertilizers may be tried on different soil textures. The table dealing with data
on such grouping has a number of columns and rows. Thus, with fertilizes in the column classification,
the various types of land textures may be in rows. But there may be sampling variations besides the two
factors considered which we call as “residual variations”. The analysis in this case will get extended to
include the sum of squares between rows, which was not there in one –way classification.
Procedure for Testing Means:
Ho: There is no significant difference between column means as well as between row means.
H1: There is significant difference between column means or between row means.
Step I: - Find N
Step II: - Find T (T = Sum of all the values of the Three samples) T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3
Step III: - Find

Step IV: - Find SSC/ SSB (Sum of Squares Between Columns)
SSB = + + +…. -
Step V: - Find SSR (Sum of Squares Between Rows)
SSR = + + +…. -
Step VI: - Find SST (SST = the Total Sum of Squares)
SST = ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 -

Step VII: - Find SSE (The Error Sum of Squares) SSE = SST – (SSC +SSR)
ANOVA Table (Two – Way Classification)
Source of Sum of Degree of Test Statistic
Mean Squares (MS)
Variation (SV) Squares (SS) Freedom (F – Ratio of Variance)
Between Samples
SSB/SSC k–1
(Columns) FC =
Between Samples
SSR r-1
(Rows)
FR =
Residual (Errors) SSW/SSE N – k- r +1
Total SST N-1 - -
Note: if MSE > MSC, Then we shall take FC = similarly MSE > MSR Then FR =
Note: The F – Ratio FC and FR should be calculated in such a way that FC and FR greater than 1. Then
only it is possible to compare these ratios with table values.
 If the calculated value of FC > the table value of F at 5% level for k -1 and N-k –r +1 d.f, we reject Ho
and conclude that the difference between the column values is significant.
 If the calculated value of FR > the table value of F at 5% level for r -1 and N-k –r +1 d.f, we reject Ho
and conclude that the difference between the column values is significant.
 Otherwise we Accept Ho
PROBLEM – 1
1. A former applies three types of fertilizers on 4 separate plots. The figures on yield per acre are
tabulated below.
Plots Yield
Total
Fertilizers A B C D
Nitrogen 6 4 8 6 24
Potash 7 6 6 9 28
Phosphates 8 5 10 9 32
Total 21 15 24 24 84 (Grand Total)
Find out if the plots are materially different in fertility, as also, if three fertilizers make any
material difference in yields.
Solution:
Let μ1 μ2 μ3 μ4 be the means of the three populations’ sample 1, sample 2, sample3 and sample4
respectively.
 Null Hypothesis Ho: μ1= μ2 = μ3 = μ4 i.e. There is no significant difference i.e., plots are equally
fertile and fertilizers are equally effective.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 ≠ μ4 i.e., There is significant difference i.e., plots are not
equally fertile and fertilizers are not equally effective.

Total
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4
(Row)
X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32 X4 X42
6 36 4 16 8 64 6 36 ƩY1= 24
7 49 6 36 6 36 9 81 ƩY2= 28
8 64 5 25 10 100 9 81 ƩY3=32
2 2 2 2
ƩX1= ƩX1 = ƩX2= ƩX2 = ƩX3= ƩX3 = ƩX4= ƩX4 =
21 149 15 77 24 200 24 198
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 21 + 15 + 24 + 24 = 84
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 18
 SSR (Sum of Squares Between Rows)
SSR = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - =8
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 149 + 77 + 200 + 198 – 558 = 66

 Degrees of Freedom (d.f) Between Groups (Columns) = (k – 1) = (4 – 1) = 3
 Degrees of Freedom (d.f) Between Groups (Rows) = (r – 1) = (3 – 1) = 2
 Degree of Freedom (d.f) Within Groups = (N –1) = (12 - 1) = 11
 Degree of Freedom (d.f) Within Groups (SSE)= (N –k – r + 1) = (12 – 4 – 3 + 1) = 6
 MSB/ MSC = Mean Square between the samples( Columns:
SSW = SST – (SSC + SSR) = 66 – (18 + 8) = 40
 MSR = Mean Square between the samples(Rows):
ANOVA TABLE
Source of Variation Sum of Degree of Mean Squares Test Statistic
(SV) Squares (SS) Freedom (MS) (F – Ratio of Variance)
18
(Columns) 4– 1 = 3 FC = = 1.11
Between Samples r–1
8
(Rows) 3– 1 = 2
Residual (Errors) 40 N – k – r +1
12 – 4-3+1 = 6 FR = = 1.7
N -1
Total 66 -
12 – 1 = 11
 The table value of F for (6, 3) degrees of freedom at 5% level is 4.76. Since the calculated value FC =
1.11 < the tabulated value at 5% level, we accept Ho and conclude that they do not show any
significant difference.
 Again the table value of F for (6, 2) degree of freedom at 5% level is 5.14. Since the calculated value
FR = 1.17 < the tabulated value at 5% level, we conclude that they do not show any significant
difference and whatever difference exists is due to sampling error.
PROBLEM – 2
2. To study the performance of three detergents and three different water temperatures the following
whiteness readings were obtained with specially designed equipment.
Water Detergent Detergent Detergent
Temperature A B C
Cold Water 57 55 67
Warm Water 49 52 68
Hot Water 54 46 58
Perform a two – way analysis of variance using 5% level of significance.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: There is no significance difference in whiteness due to the three varieties of
detergents and / or three different water temperatures.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: There is significance difference in whiteness due to the three varieties of
detergents and / or three different water temperatures.
The given data are first coded by subtracting 50 from each observation and then classified
according to two factors: i( Detergent and ii) Water temperature in the following table.
Water Detergent Detergent Detergent

Temperature A B C
Cold Water 7 5 17
Warm Water -1 2 18
Hot Water 4 -4 8

Total
2 2 (Row)
X1 X1 X2 X2 X3 X32
7 49 5 25 17 289 ƩY1= 29
-1 1 2 4 18 324 ƩY2= 19
4 16 -4 16 8 64 ƩY3= 8
ƩX1= 10 ƩX12= 66 ƩX2= 3 ƩX22= 45 ƩX3= 43 ƩX32= 677
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 10 + 3 + 43 = 56
Correction factor = = 348. 44 (Here N = 3 × 3 = 9 or No of Observations = 9)
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 304.22
SSR = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 73.55
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 66 + 45 + 677 – 348.44 = 439.56


SSW = SST – (SSC + SSR) = 439.56 – (304.22 + 73.55) = 61.79
ANOVA TABLE
304.22
(Columns) 3– 1 = 2 FC = = 9.85
73.55
(Rows) 3– 1 = 2
Residual (Errors) 61.79 N – k – r +1
9 – 3-3+1 = 4 FR = = 2.38
N -1
Total 439.56 -
9–1=8
9.85 > the tabulated value at 5% level, we reject Ho and conclude that there is significant difference in
whiteness due to the three varieties of detergents.
FR = 2.38 < the tabulated value at 5% level, Hence we accept Ho at 5% level and conclude that there is
no difference in whiteness due to three different temperatures of waters.
PROBLEM – 3
3. Perform a two way ANOVA on the data given.
Treatment I
i ii iii
i 30 26 38
ii 24 29 28
Treatment II iii 33 24 35
iv 36 31 30
v 27 35 33
Perform a two – way analysis of variance using 5% level of significance.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: There is no significance difference between column means as well as between
row means.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: There is significance difference between column means as well as
between row means.
The given data are first coded by subtracting 30 from each observation.
Treatment I
i ii iii
i 0 -4 8
ii -6 -1 -2
Treatment II iii 3 -6 5
iv 6 1 0
v -3 5 3

Total
2 2 (Row)
X1 X1 X2 X2 X3 X32
0 0 -4 16 8 64 ƩY1= 4
-6 36 -1 1 -2 4 ƩY2= -9
3 9 -6 36 5 25 ƩY3= 2
6 36 1 1 0 0 ƩY4= 7
-3 9 5 25 3 9 ƩY5= 5
ƩX1= 0 ƩX12= 90 ƩX2= -5 ƩX22= 79 ƩX3= 14 ƩX32= 102
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 0 - 5 + 14 = 9
Correction factor = = 5.4 (Here N = 3 × 5 = 15 or No of Observations = 15)
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 38.8
SSR = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 52.92
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 90 + 79 + 102 – 5.4 = 265.5


SSW = SST – (SSC + SSR) = 265.5 – (38.8 + 52.92) = 173.78
ANOVA TABLE
33.8
(Columns) 3– 1 = 2 FC = = 1.12
52.92
(Rows) 5– 1 = 4
15 – 3-5+1 = 8 FR = = 1.64
N -1
Total 265.5 -
15 – 1 = 14
 The table value of F for (8, 2) degrees of freedom at 5% level is 4.46.4. Since the calculated value FC
= 1.12 < the tabulated value at 5% level, we accept Ho
FR = 1.64 < the tabulated value at 5% level, Hence we accept Ho at 5% level.
Conclusion: In both cases calculated value F < the table value of F. Hence there is no
significant difference between the means due to treatment I or Treatment II.
PROBLEM – 4
4. The following table gives the number of units of production per day turned out by four different types
of machines.
Type of Machines
M1 M2 M3 M4
E1 40 36 45 30
E2 38 42 50 41
Employee
E3 36 30 48 35
E4 46 47 52 44
Using analysis of variance (i) Test the hypothesis that the mean production is the same for the
four machines, and (ii) Test the hypothesis that the employees do not differ with respect to mean
productivity.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: M1 = M2 = M3 = M4 i.e., the mean production does not differ for the four
machines and the employees do not differ with respect of mean productivity.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: M1 ≠ M2 ≠ M3 ≠ M4 i.e., the mean production differ for the four
machines and the employees differ with respect of mean productivity.
The given data are first coded by subtracting 40 from each observation.
Type of Machines
M1 M2 M3 M4
E1 0 -4 5 -10
E2 -2 2 10 1
Employee
E3 -4 10 8 -5
E4 6 7 12 4

Total
(Row)
X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32 X4 X42
0 0 -4 16 5 25 -10 100 ƩY1= -9
-2 4 2 4 10 100 1 1 ƩY2= 11
-4 16 10 100 8 64 -5 25 ƩY3=-11
6 36 7 49 12 144 4 16 ƩY4= 29
ƩX1= ƩX1 = ƩX2= ƩX2 = ƩX3= ƩX3 = ƩX4= ƩX42=
2 2 2
0 149 -5 77 35 200 -10 198
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 0 - 5 + 35 – 10 = 20
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 312.5
SSR = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 266
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 149 + 74 + 200 + 198 – 25 = 675


SSW = SST – (SSC + SSR) = 675 – (312.5 + 266) = 96.5
ANOVA TABLE
312.5
(Columns) 4– 1 = 3 FC = = 9.72
266.0
(Rows) 4– 1 = 3
16 – 4-4+1 = 9 FR = = 8.27
N -1
Total 675.0 -
16 – 1 = 15
9.72 > the tabulated value at 5% level, we reject Ho
FR = 8.27 > the tabulated value at 5% level, Hence we reject Ho at 5% level.
Conclusion: In both cases calculated value F > the table value of F. Hence there is significant
difference between the mean production and mean productivity.
Hence the mean production is not the same for the four machines and Employees differ with respect of
mean productivity.
PROBLEM – 5
5. The following table give monthly sales (in Thousands rupees) of a certain firm in three states by its
four salesmen.
Salesmen
I II III IV
A 6 5 3 8
States B 8 9 6 5
C 10 7 8 7
Set up the analysis of variance table and test whether there is any significant difference (i)
between sales by the firm salesmen and (ii) between sales in the three states.
Solution:
 Null Hypothesis Ho: The sales of different salesmen do not differ and there is no significant
difference between sales in the three states.
 Alternative Hypothesis H1: There is a significant difference between the sales by the firm salesmen
and there is significant difference between sales in the three states.

Total
(Row)
X1 X12 X2 X22 X3 X32 X4 X42
6 36 5 25 3 9 8 64 ƩY1= 22
8 64 9 81 6 36 5 25 ƩY2= 28
10 100 7 49 8 64 7 49 ƩY3= 32
2 2 2
ƩX1= ƩX1 = ƩX2= ƩX2 = ƩX3= ƩX3 = ƩX4= ƩX4 =
2
24 200 21 155 17 109 20 138
T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 24 + 21 + 17 + 20 = 82
Correction factor = = 560.333 (Here N = 4 × 3 = 12 or No of Observations = 12)
SSB = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - 560.333 = 8.344
SSR = + + +…. -
SSB = + + - = 12.667
= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + … ƩXk2 - = 200 + 155 + 109 + 138 – 560.333 = 41.667

SSW = SST – (SSC + SSR) = 41.667 – (8.334 + 12.667) = 30.666
ANOVA TABLE
8.334
(Columns) 4– 1 = 3 FC = = 1.84
12.667
(Rows) 3– 1 = 2
12 – 4-3+1 = 6 FR = = 1.239
N -1
Total 41.667 -
12 – 1 = 11
1.84 < the tabulated value at 5% level, we Accept Ho
FR = 1.239 < the tabulated value at 5% level, Hence we accept Ho at 5% level.
Conclusion: In both cases calculated value F < the table value of F. Hence the sales of
different salesmen do not differ significantly and there is no significant difference in the states as far
as sales are concerned.
PROBLEM – 6
6. In a certain factory, production can be accomplished by four different workers on five different types
of machines. A sample study in context of a two – way design without repeated values is being made
with two fold objective of examining whether the four workers differ with respect to mean production
and whether the mean productivity is the same for all the five machines. The researcher involved in this
study reports while analysing the given data as under.
i) Sum of Squares for variation between machine = 35.2
ii) Sum of Squares for variation between workmen = 53.8
iii) Sum of Squares for total variation = 174.2
Set up ANOVA table for the given information and draw the inference about variations at 5%
level of significance.
Solution:
 Ho: Worker does not differ significantly with respect to mean productivity and mean productivity
is the same for five different machines.
 H1: Workers and machines differ with respect to their mean productivity.
MSB/ MSC = Mean Square between the samples (Columns):
SSW/ SSE = Sum of the Squares within the samples:

SSW = SST – (SSC + SSR) = 174.2 – (35.2 + 53.8) = 85.2
MSR = Mean Square between the samples (Rows):
MSW/MSE = Mean Square within the samples:
ANOVA TABLE
35.2
(Columns) 5– 1 = 4 FC = = 1.24
53.8
(Rows) 4– 1 = 3
20 – 5-4+1 = 12 FR = = 2.53
N -1
Total 174.2 -
20– 1 = 19
 The table value of F for (12, 4) degrees of freedom at 5% level is 3.26. Since the calculated value FC
= 1.24 < the tabulated value at 5% level, we Accept Ho
 Again the table value of F for (12, 3) degree of freedom at 5% level is 3.49. Since the calculated
value FR = 2.53 < the tabulated value at 5% level, Hence we accept Ho at 5% level.
Conclusion: In both cases calculated value F < the table value of F. Hence the sales of different
salesmen do not differ significantly and there is no significant difference in the states as far as sales
are concerned.

ANOVA Unit - 4 BRM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

ANOVA Unit - 4 BRM

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANOVA Unit - 4 BRM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1|Page Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) by Dr.

i. Variance between Samples.

Assumptions in Analysis of Variance:

ANOVA Technique can be classified in Two ways

One - way For one Independent

 One – way Classification:

 Two – way Classification:

ANOVA for One – way Classification

The techniques for ANOVA One – way Classification are:

One - way ANOVA

Short - Cut Method

The Alternative Hypothesis is H1: μ1≠ μ2 ≠ μ3 ≠………. μk

Step 1: Calculation of Variance Between the Samples.

iv. Calculate SSB/ SSC and MSB/MSC:

Freedom (v1) = (No of Samples – 1) = k - 1

 MSB indicates the degree of explained variance due to sampling fluctuations

Step 2: Calculation of Variance Within the Samples:

 MSW (or MSE) = Variance or Mean Square within the samples

ANOVA Table (One – way Classification)

SST = Total Sum of Squares of Variations = SSB + SSW

Analysis of the Degrees of Freedom:

 Degrees of Freedom (d.f) Between Groups = (k – 1) = (3 – 1) = 2 (3 Groups)

Step 1: Calculation of Variance Between the Samples.

Grand Mean ̿ = = 10.25

 SSB = Sum of the Squares between the Samples: ∑ i

SSB = 6.25 + 49 + 90.25 = 145.5

 MSB = Mean Square between the Samples: = = 72.75

Calculations for SSW

SSW = 22 + 8.75 + 52 = 82.75

= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 -

ii. Subtract the correction factor from (i)

Thus, SSB/SSC = + + +…. -

ANOVA Table (One – way Classification)

Calculations for Short – Cut Method

 T = Sum of all the values of the Three samples:

T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 60 + 50 + 70 = 180

Correction factor = = 2160 (Here N = 3 × 5 = 15 or No of Observations = 15)

 SST = the Total Sum of Squares:

(3600 + 2500 + 4900) – 2160 = 2200 – 2160 = 40

 MSB/MSC = Mean Square between the samples:

 SSW/ SSE = Sum of the Squares within the samples:

SSW = SST –SSB = 100 – 40 = 60

 MSW/MSE = Mean Square within the samples:

 T = Sum of all the values of the Three samples:

T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 24 + 20 + 16 = 60

Correction factor = = 300 (Here N = 3 × 4 = 12 or No of Observations = 12)

 SST = the Total Sum of Squares:

= ƩX12 + ƩX22 + ƩX32 + …….. ƩXk2 - = 158 + 108 + 66 – 300 = 32

SSB = + + - = 144 + 100 + 64 – 300 = 8

 Analysis of the Degrees of Freedom:

 MSB/ MSC = Mean Square between the samples:

 SSW/ SSE = Sum of the Squares within the samples:

SSW = SST –SSB = 32 – 8 = 24

 MSW/MSE = Mean Square within the samples:

Calculations for Short – Cut Method

 T = Sum of all the values of the Three samples:

T = ƩX1 + ƩX2 + ƩX3 = 100 + 95 + 135 = 330

Correction factor = = 7260 (Here N = 3 × 5 = 15 or No of Observations = 15)