Abstract
A Monte Carlo simulation evaluated six pairwise multiple comparison procedures for controlling Type I error rates, any-pair power, and all-pairs power. Realistic conditions of nonnormality were based on a previous survey, and the effects of outliers were investigated. Variance ratios varied from 1:1 to 8:1. Evaluated procedures included Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) preceded by an F-test, the Hayter–Fisher, the Games–Howell procedure tested at 0.9α, the Peritz with F-tests, the Peritz with Brown–Forsythe tests, and the Peritz with Alexander–Govern tests. Peritz with Brown–Forsythe procedure shows the greatest robustness in Type I error control. Any-pair power is generally best with the Hayter–Fisher, whereas all-pairs power is best with the Peritz F-test procedure. Even though the Hayter–Fisher shows only slightly lower all-pair power rates than the Peritz, it is still much easier to perform.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
