Independent One-Way ANOVA

Slide 9.
Chapter 9
Independent one-way ANOVA
Mayers, Statistics and SPSS in Psychology PowerPoints on the Web, 1st edition © Pearson Education Limited 2013
Slide 9.2
Overview
▪ What the test measures

▪ Theory and rationale
▪ Working examples
▪ Demonstrations in SPSS
▪ How to interpret output
▪ How to write-up in results
▪ See Chapter 9 in book
Slide 9.3
ANOVA: Setting the scene
▪ ANOVA is an acronym for Analysis of Variance

▪ Series of tests that explore differences between groups
▪ Or across conditions in respect of one group
▪ Analysis of Variance type depends on number and nature of
independent variables
▪ And number of dependent variables
▪ Analysis of Variance explores amount of variance that can be
‘explained’
▪ By difference between the observed groups or conditions
▪ Or how much is due to chance or error factors
Slide 9.4
What does independent one-way

ANOVA do?
▪ Examines differences in mean parametric dependent variable scores

▪ Usually, between three or more distinct groups (independent
variable)
▪ Can be used with two groups
▪ But independent t-test is more commonly used for that
▪ We will revisit criteria for parametric tests later
▪ Explores data from between-group studies
Slide 9.5
Research question
▪ Fellowship of University Student Surveys (FUSS)

▪ Explore contact hours across university courses
▪ Collect data from several universities
▪ Investigate how many hours spent in lectures
▪ According to three courses
▪ Law, psychology, and media
▪ FUSS expect that there is a difference
▪ But do not specify what the differences might be
▪ All outcomes in this example are based on entirely fictitious data!
Slide 9.6
Table 9.1 No. of lecture hours attended per week
Slide 9.7
MODEL SUM of SQUARES
RESIDUAL SUM of SQUARES
Slide 9.8
Slide 9.9
Lets Calculate F
Slide 9.10
What is variance?
▪ Any distribution of scores will usually vary

▪ e.g. questionnaire responses
▪ Likely to vary between people – individual differences
▪ To examine the extent of variation, we need to find grand mean
▪ Overall average of all scores (responses)
▪ Investigate how much scores vary either side of that
▪ The amount that the scores vary is called the ‘variance’
Slide 9.11
Measuring differences with ANOVA
▪ ANOVA tests ‘partition’ variance into separate pots

▪ Partitions called ‘sum of squares’
▪ Overall variance = total sum of squares

▪ How much scores have varied overall to grand mean
▪ We need to see how much of variance we can ‘explain’

▪ Scores may vary because of differences between people
answering the questions
▪ Income may vary according to level of education
▪ That may explain the variance
▪ OR scores may due to random or chance factors
▪ This is the variance that we cannot explain
Slide 9.12
Measuring differences (Continued)
▪ Independent one-way ANOVA explores how much variance can be

explained
▪ Indicated by ‘model sum of squares’ SSM
▪ Found from difference between group means and grand mean
▪ ‘Unexplained’ variance (error) = ‘residual sum of squares’ SSR
▪ Found from group variance
▪ Sums of squares expressed in relation to ‘degrees of freedom’ (df)
▪ Model sum (dfM): number of groups minus 1
▪ Residual sum (dfR): (sample size minus 1) minus dfM
Slide 9.13
▪ Sums of squares divided by degrees of freedom

▪ Produces ‘mean squares’
▪ Model mean square MSM
▪ Residual mean square MSR
▪ MSM ÷ MSR = F ratio
▪ Illustrates proportion of overall variance that has been explained
▪ In relation to unexplained variance
▪ Statistical significance more likely the higher the F ratio
Slide 9.14
▪ F ratio compared to F-Distribution table

▪ Provides cut-off points
▪ According to numerator and denominator degrees of freedom
▪ Found from number of groups and sample size
(accordingly)
▪ And at agreed level of significance (usually p = .05)
▪ If F ratio > cut-off  significant outcome
Slide 9.15
Finding the source of difference
▪ F ratio indicates whether overall diff in mean scores between groups

▪ But will not tell you where difference is
▪ With independent t-test, we know where difference lies

▪ We only have two groups
▪ In ANOVA when there are three or more groups, not as simple as

that
▪ We might find significant difference in lecture hours attended
▪ Between the student groups
▪ But do not know which groups are significantly different

▪ ‘Law vs. psychology?’
▪ ‘Psychology vs. media? …’
▪ We can resolve this with one of two additional tests:

▪ Planned contrasts
▪ Post-hoc tests
Slide 9.16
Multiple comparisons
▪ Key difference planned contrasts vs. post-hoc tests

▪ Significant outcomes in any test based on probability
▪ (Usually) <5% likelihood observed outcome occurred by chance
▪ The more tests we run…

▪ … the greater the chance of Type I errors
▪ We must allow for this
▪ If we predict several specific outcomes

▪ We can test each one at the 5% probability level
▪ Orthogonal planned contrasts – no need to adjust
▪ Non-orthogonal planned contrasts – we must adjust

▪ If no specific prediction
▪ We ‘share’ 5% p-value across the number of additional tests
needed
Post-hoc tests make those adjustments
Slide 9.17
Post-hoc tests
▪ Must be used if no specific prediction made about group outcome

▪ But I tend to use these in all cases, because more cautious
▪ Automatically adjust for multiple comparisons
▪ Much easier to run – just tick a box
▪ But you must choose the correct post-hoc test
▪ SPSS has about 18 choices!
▪ We will explore those shortly
▪ Post-hoc tests examine mean differences
▪ Between groups or conditions
Slide 9.18
Options for post-hoc tests
▪ Choice of post-hoc test depends on two criteria

▪ Equal group sizes
▪ Equality of variances (see more about this later)
▪ Here are some of the tests you are most likely to use
▪ According to those criteria
▪ Equal groups and equal variances
▪ Tukey: most commonly used (conservative, but with good power)
▪ Scheffé, Bonferonni, REGWQ: might be too conservative
▪ But many researchers still favour Scheffé and Bonferonni
▪ REGWQ: useful for when there is more than four groups
▪ Least significant difference (LSD): not recommended
▪ Does not adjust for multiple comparisons
Slide 9.19
Options for post-hoc tests (Continued)
▪ Non-equal groups
▪ Gabriel’s: quite commonly used in this context
▪ Hochberg’s GF2: probably better if group-size difference large
▪ Equal variances not assumed
▪ Games–Howell: most commonly used in this context
▪ Probably wise to select it when setting up SPSS
▪ May not know whether you have equality of variances
▪ Until you have run other statistics
▪ We will see how to select and interpret post-hoc tests later
Slide 9.20
Assumptions and restrictions
▪ Dependent variable data must be parametric

▪ Should be normally distributed
▪ Measured across all groups
▪ Should be interval or ratio

▪ If parametric criteria not met
▪ May need to use non-parametric test (Kruskal–Wallis)
▪ Independent variable must be categorical

▪ Usually three or more groups
▪ Groups must be independent of each other
▪ No person or case can appear in both groups
▪ Homogeneity of variance important between groups

▪ Especially if there are unequal groups
Slide 9.21
Homogeneity of variance
▪ We expect to find between-group differences in mean dependent

variable scores
▪ But we need variances in each group to be similar
▪ Otherwise, assumptions about significance may be invalid
▪ ANOVA is pretty robust to violations with equal group sizes

▪ But much more of a problem when group sizes unequal
▪ As we have seen, variance affects significance

▪ Significance more likely with smaller variance
▪ If larger groups have larger variance than smaller groups:

▪ F ratio tends to be understated
▪ Significant outcomes less likely  Type II errors
▪ If the larger groups have the smaller variance

▪ F ratio tends to be overstated
▪ Significant outcomes more likely  Type I errors
Slide 9.22
Homogeneity of variance (Continued)
▪ Measured via Levene’s test

▪ We must request it when running any between-group ANOVA
▪ Checks whether variances significantly different between groups
▪ We don’t want that
▪ So Levene’s test must be non-significant to indicate homogeneity
▪ If violated:
▪ 1. Ensure correct post-hoc test is selected
▪ 2. If unequal group sizes – we must run additional tests
▪ Brown – Forsythe F and Welch’s F adjustments
▪ SPSS produces ‘adjusted’ outcome
▪ So, if we know we have unequal group sizes

▪ Ask for Brown – Forsythe and Welch’s adjustments just in case
Slide 9.23
Establishing significant differences
▪ In Chapter 9 you can see how to perform calculations manually

▪ Maths, formulae, etc.
▪ Very much encourage you to do this
▪ Meanwhile, we will now see how to do this in SPSS
▪ FUSS data set:
▪ Number of lecture hours attended (dependent variable)
▪ Course (independent variable)
▪ Three student groups: law, psychology, and media
▪ There are equal numbers of students in each group (10)
Slide 9.24
Checking normal distribution
▪ Number of lecture hours = interval data – so that’s OK

▪ But we must test Normal Distribution (across all groups)
▪ Depending on sample size
▪ Open SPSS data set Lecture hours
▪ Select Analyze  Descriptive Statistics  Explore  transfer

Lecture hours to Dependent List  transfer Course to Factor
List  select Plots radio button
Slide 9.25
Running independent one-way ANOVA

in SPSS
▪ Using SPSS data set Lecture hours
▪ Select Analyze  Compare Means  One-Way ANOVA… 

transfer Lecture hours to Dependent List  transfer Course to
Factor  click Post-Hoc button  (in new window) tick Tukey and
Games-Howell boxes (see previous slide: Tukey, because we have equal
group sizes; Games-Howell, because we don’t know if we have equality of
variances)  click Continue  click Options… (in new window) tick
Descriptives, Homogeneity of variance testclick Continue  click
OK
Slide 9.26
SPSS output
▪ The first table shows descriptive statistics
Figure 9.8 Descriptives for independent one-way ANOVA
▪ Law and psychology students quite similar on number of lecture

hours attended
▪ Media students rather less
▪ But, are these differences significant?
▪ If so, what is the source of the difference?
Slide 9.27
SPSS output (Continued)
▪ Before we examine significance

▪ We need to check for homogeneity of variance
Figure 9.9 Test for homogeneity of variances
▪ Levene’s test not significant (p = .669)

▪ Equal variances can be assumed
Slide 9.28
▪ Main significance outcome:
Figure 9.10 ANOVA statistics

▪ There is significant difference in lecture hours attended between
course groups
▪ F (2, 27) = 12.687, p < .001
▪ Always present statistical notation like this

▪ F (BG df, WG df) = F value, p = .sig
▪ Significant difference is usually full displayed value (e.g. p = .033)

▪ Except when SPSS indicates sig. = .000
▪ Then present as p < .001
Slide 9.29
▪ What if homogeneity of variances not assumed?

▪ ‘Adjusted’ outcome
Figure 9.11 Adjusted outcome for homogeneity of variance
▪ We did not need to adjust outcome

▪ But useful to see what the results would look like
▪ Some ‘minor’ adjustment

▪ Residual degrees of freedom lowered
▪ (Welch’s) F ratio increased
▪ Effect of adjustment here minimal

▪ Outcome still highly significant
Slide 9.30
SPSS output: Post-hoc test
▪ ‘Omnibus’ ANOVA only indicated there was a significant difference

▪ We need post-hoc tests to tell us source of difference
Figure 9.12 Post-hoc statistics

Slide 9.31
SPSS output: Post-hoc test

(Continued)
▪ Because equal variances assumed we only need Tukey this time
▪ Significant differences in lecture hours between groups: where ‘Sig.’

< .05
▪ Further highlighted by asterisk
▪ Law students > Media students (p = .001)
▪ Psychology students > Media students (p < .001)
▪ No other differences elsewhere
Slide 9.32
Writing-up results
▪ Produce your OWN table

▪ Don’t tabulate post-hoc data (just report that)
Table 9.5 Mean lecture hours by course
▪ Write something like this:

▪ An independent one-way ANOVA indicated that lecture hours attended
differed significantly according to course, F (2, 27) = 12.687, p < .001.
A post-hoc (Tukey) test indicated that media students attended
significantly fewer lecture hours than law students (p = .001) and than
psychology students (p < .001).
Slide 9.33
Drawing graphs
▪ You could add a graph

▪ But only if it does not duplicate what is shown in tables
▪ Using SPSS data set Lecture hours
▪ Select Graphs  Chart Builder  select Bar from list under

Choose from:  click Simple Bar graphic (in top left corner)  drag
that into display area  transfer Lecture hours to Y-Axis box
 transfer Course to X-Axis box  to include error bars, tick
box for Display error bars in Element Properties box (to right of
main display box)  ensure that it states 95% confidence intervals
in the box below  click Apply  click OK
Slide 9.34
Completed graph
Figure 9.16 Completed bar chart

Slide 9.35
Summary
▪ We have been learning about independent one-way ANOVA

▪ When to use it and how to use it
▪ Measures differences between 3+ distinct groups (usually)
▪ Which represent the independent variable
▪ Independent variable must be categorical
▪ Groups must be independent of each other

▪ In respect of a single parametric dependent variable
▪ Dependent variable data should be reasonably normally distributed
▪ Dependent variable data should be interval or ratio
▪ There should be homogeneity of variances between the groups
▪ Additional tests needed to explore source of difference (post-hoc, etc)
▪ We saw how to… run test in SPSS

▪ Interpret output
▪ Write up results
Slide 9.36
Table 9.1 No. of lecture hours attended per week

Independent One-Way ANOVA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Independent One-Way ANOVA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Slide 9.

▪ What the test measures

▪ See Chapter 9 in book

ANOVA: Setting the scene

▪ ANOVA is an acronym for Analysis of Variance

What does independent one-way

▪ Examines differences in mean parametric dependent variable scores

▪ Fellowship of University Student Surveys (FUSS)

▪ All outcomes in this example are based on entirely fictitious data!

Table 9.1 No. of lecture hours attended per week

MODEL SUM of SQUARES

RESIDUAL SUM of SQUARES

▪ Any distribution of scores will usually vary

Measuring differences with ANOVA

▪ ANOVA tests ‘partition’ variance into separate pots

▪ Overall variance = total sum of squares

▪ We need to see how much of variance we can ‘explain’

▪ That may explain the variance

▪ OR scores may due to random or chance factors

▪ This is the variance that we cannot explain

Measuring differences (Continued)

▪ Independent one-way ANOVA explores how much variance can be

Measuring differences (Continued)

▪ Sums of squares divided by degrees of freedom

Measuring differences (Continued)

▪ F ratio compared to F-Distribution table

Finding the source of difference

▪ F ratio indicates whether overall diff in mean scores between groups

▪ With independent t-test, we know where difference lies

▪ In ANOVA when there are three or more groups, not as simple as

▪ But do not know which groups are significantly different

▪ ‘Psychology vs. media? …’

▪ We can resolve this with one of two additional tests:

▪ Key difference planned contrasts vs. post-hoc tests

▪ The more tests we run…

▪ We must allow for this

▪ If we predict several specific outcomes

▪ Orthogonal planned contrasts – no need to adjust

▪ Non-orthogonal planned contrasts – we must adjust

▪ Must be used if no specific prediction made about group outcome

Options for post-hoc tests

▪ Choice of post-hoc test depends on two criteria

Options for post-hoc tests (Continued)

Assumptions and restrictions

▪ Dependent variable data must be parametric

▪ Measured across all groups

▪ Should be interval or ratio

▪ Independent variable must be categorical

▪ Groups must be independent of each other

▪ No person or case can appear in both groups

▪ Homogeneity of variance important between groups

▪ We expect to find between-group differences in mean dependent

▪ Otherwise, assumptions about significance may be invalid

▪ ANOVA is pretty robust to violations with equal group sizes

▪ As we have seen, variance affects significance

▪ If larger groups have larger variance than smaller groups:

▪ Significant outcomes less likely  Type II errors

▪ If the larger groups have the smaller variance

▪ Significant outcomes more likely  Type I errors

Homogeneity of variance (Continued)

▪ Measured via Levene’s test

▪ Checks whether variances significantly different between groups

▪ We don’t want that