Assignment 6

Bui Duy Duc – M997Z202

1. One-way ANOVA-CRD
(a) At α = 0.05 determine whether four different methods of growing corn resulted in various
yield per acre on various plots of ground where the four methods were tied.
(i) Null and alternative hypotheses
H0 : µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ4
H1 : µi’s are not all equal

(ii) P-value of the test

ANOVA

Yield per acre

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 1028.604 3 342.868 30.711 .000

Within Groups 334.926 30 11.164

Total 1363.529 33

p-value = 0.0001
(iii) Conclusion
p-value = 0.0001 < 0.05 -> there is enough confidence to reject H0
so we can conclude that of growing corn resulted in various yields per acre on
various plots of ground where the four methods were tried are different

(b) At α = 0.05, determine if method 1 tends to furnish higher yields than method 2
(i) Null and alternative hypotheses
H0: µ1 ≤ µ2
H1: µ1 > µ2
(ii) P-value
 Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable:Yield per acre

(I) (J) 95% Confidence Interval

Method Method
of of
growing growing Mean Difference
corn corn (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound

Tukey HSD 1 2 4.156 1.535 .051 -.02 8.33

3 -5.159* 1.684 .023 -9.74 -.58

4 10.681* 1.624 .000 6.27 15.10

2 1 -4.156 1.535 .051 -8.33 .02

3 -9.314* 1.647 .000 -13.79 -4.84

4 6.525* 1.585 .001 2.22 10.83

3 1 5.159* 1.684 .023 .58 9.74

2 9.314* 1.647 .000 4.84 13.79

4 15.839* 1.729 .000 11.14 20.54

4 1 -10.681* 1.624 .000 -15.10 -6.27

2 -6.525* 1.585 .001 -10.83 -2.22

3 -15.839* 1.729 .000 -20.54 -11.14

LSD 1 2 4.156* 1.535 .011 1.02 7.29

3 -5.159* 1.684 .005 -8.60 -1.72

4 10.681* 1.624 .000 7.36 14.00

2 1 -4.156* 1.535 .011 -7.29 -1.02

3 -9.314* 1.647 .000 -12.68 -5.95

4 6.525* 1.585 .000 3.29 9.76

3 1 5.159* 1.684 .005 1.72 8.60

2 9.314* 1.647 .000 5.95 12.68

4 15.839* 1.729 .000 12.31 19.37

4 1 -10.681* 1.624 .000 -14.00 -7.36

2 -6.525* 1.585 .000 -9.76 -3.29

3 -15.839* 1.729 .000 -19.37 -12.31

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

 p-value = 0.051/2 = 0.0255
(iii) Conclusion
p-value = 0.0255 < 0.05 -> there is enough evidence to reject H0 and accept H1
so we can conclude that method 1 tends to furnish higher yields than method 2
(c) At α = 0.05 , determine if method 3 tends to furnish higher yields than method 1 and
method 2 on average
(i) Null and alternative hypotheses
H0 : µ3 ≤ (µ1 + µ2)/2
H1 : µ3 > (µ1 + µ2)/2

(ii) P-value of the test

Contrast Tests

Contras
t Value of Contrast Std. Error t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Yield per acre Assume equal variances 1 -14.47 2.956 -4.897 30 .000

Does not assume equal 1

-14.47 3.235 -4.474 10.916 .001
variances

p-value = 0.001/2 = 0.0005

(iii) Conclusion
p-value = 0.0005 < 0.05 -> there is enough evidence to reject H0 and accept H1
so we can conclude that method 3 tends to furnish higher yields than method 1 and
method 2 on average.
2. Use Kruskal-Wallis test
(a) At α = 0.05 determine whether four different methods of growing corn resulted in various
yields per acre on various plots of ground where the four methods were tried
(i) Null and alternative hypotheses
H0 : µ1 = µ2 = µ3 = µ4
H1 : µi’s are not all equal
(ii) P-value

Kruskal-Wallis Test
 Ranks

Method of
growing corn N Mean Rank

Yield per acre 1 9 21.83

2 10 15.30

3 7 29.57

4 8 4.81

Total 34

Test Statisticsa,b

Yield per acre

Chi-Square 25.629

df 3

Asymp. Sig. .000

a. Kruskal Wallis Test

b. Grouping Variable: Method of

growing corn

p-value = 0.0001
(iii) Conclusion
p-value = 0.0001 < 0.05 -> there is enough confidence to reject H0 , accept H1
so we can conclude that of growing corn resulted in various yields per acre on
various plots of ground where the four methods were tried are different
(b) At α = 0.05, determine if method 1 tends to furnish higher yields than method 2
(i) Null and alternative hypotheses
H0: µ1 ≤ µ2
H1: µ1 > µ2
(ii) P-value
H = 25.464
t12 = 2.8474
we have t12 > 0 then p-value = 2*P(t30≥t12 ) = 0.007881 / 2 = 0.00394
(iii) conclusion
p-value = 0.00394 < 0.05 then reject H0 , accept H1
we can conclude that method 1 tends to furnish higher yields than method 2
 (c) At α = 0.05 , determine if method 3 tends to furnish higher yields than method 1 and
method 2 on average
(i) Null and alternative hypotheses
H0 : µ3 ≤ (µ1 + µ2)/2
H1 : µ3 > (µ1 + µ2)/2

(ii) P-value of the test

Use ( C1 , C2 , C3 , C4 ) = ( 1 , 1 , -2 , 0 )
H = 25.464
t = -4.629
t < 0 -> p-value = 2*P( t30 ≤ -4.629 )
p-value = 0.000033
(iii) Conclusion
p-value = 0.0005 < 0.05 -> there is enough evidence to reject H0 and accept H1
so we can conclude that method 3 tends to furnish higher yields than method 1 and
method 2 on average.

3. Determine whether One-way ANOVA-CRD is valid to analyze this data

(a) Checking for the normality of four populations.
(i) Draw the normal probability plot of the residuals
(ii) Draw the histogram with normal curve superimposed on it of the residuals.

(iii) Comment on the skewness of the residuals.

Descriptives

Statistic Std. Error

Standardized Residual for Mean .0000 .16352
Yield
95% Confidence Interval for Lower Bound -.3327
Mean
Upper Bound .3327

5% Trimmed Mean .0214

Median .0615

Variance .909

Std. Deviation .95346

Minimum -2.26

Maximum 1.63

Range 3.89

Interquartile Range 1.39

Skewness -.155 .403

Kurtosis -.338 .788

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Standardized Residual for

.070 34 .200* .980 34 .783
Yield

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

 S = -0.155 , Sk = 0.403 => the distribution is symmetric

(iv) Comment on the kurtosis of the residuals

 Kt = -0.338 , Skt = 0.788 => the distribution is mesokurtic

(v) an appropriate test of normality

(1) hypotheses
Let ԑ = the random errors
H0: ԑ is Normal
H1: ԑ is not Normal
(2) p-value
n=34 < 50 -> p-value = 0.783
 (3) conclusion
we have that the distribution is symmetric and mesokuritc
p-value = 0.783 > 0.5
then we can conclude that the distribution is normal

(vi) Considering all the above evidences

We can conclude that the population is normality distribution

(b) Checking for the homogeneity of four population variances.

(i) Drew the residual plot.

(ii) Perform the Levene’ s test

(1) What are the null and alternative hypotheses?
H0 : σ1 = σ 2 = σ 3 = σ 4
H1 : σ i’s are not all equal
(2) P-value
 Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variancesa

Dependent Variable:Yield per acre

F df1 df2 Sig.

1.978 3 30 .138

Tests the null hypothesis that the error variance of the dependent variable is
equal across groups.

a. Design: Intercept + Method

p-value = 0.138
(3) Conclusion
P-value = 0.138 > 0.05 -> there is enough evidence to accept H0 , reject H1
So we can conclude that 4 populations are homogeneous.
(iii) Considering both the residual plot and the test result, what is your conclusion about
the population variances?
Based on the residual plot and the test result, we can observed that 4
populations are equal

(c) Finally, will you adopt the analysis results from 1 or 2?

I would adopt the analysis results from ANOVA-CRD test because the population is normal
and σ i’s are all equal.