Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance

Anthony Hilton, Richard A. Armstrong

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

Abstract

The two-way design has been variously described as a matched-sample F-test, a simple within-subjects ANOVA, a one-way within-groups ANOVA, a simple correlated-groups ANOVA, and a one-factor repeated measures design! This confusion of terminology is likely to lead to problems in correctly identifying this analysis within commercially available software. The essential feature of the design is that each treatment is allocated by randomization to one experimental unit within each group or block. The block may be a plot of land, a single occasion in which the experiment was performed, or a human subject. The ‘blocking’ is designed to remove an aspect of the error variation and increase the ‘power’ of the experiment. If there is no significant source of variation associated with the ‘blocking’ then there is a disadvantage to the two-way design because there is a reduction in the DF of the error term compared with a fully randomised design thus reducing the ‘power’ of the analysis.
Original languageEnglish
Pages41-42
Number of pages2
Volume2007
Specialist publicationMicrobiologist
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2007

Fingerprint

Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
Terminology
Experiments

Keywords

  • ANOVA

Cite this

Hilton, A., & Armstrong, R. A. (2007). Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance. Microbiologist, 2007, 41-42.
Hilton, Anthony ; Armstrong, Richard A. / Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance. In: Microbiologist. 2007 ; Vol. 2007. pp. 41-42.
@misc{03a4fe31b2b14e60aa8528e84bd33f30,
title = "Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance",
abstract = "The two-way design has been variously described as a matched-sample F-test, a simple within-subjects ANOVA, a one-way within-groups ANOVA, a simple correlated-groups ANOVA, and a one-factor repeated measures design! This confusion of terminology is likely to lead to problems in correctly identifying this analysis within commercially available software. The essential feature of the design is that each treatment is allocated by randomization to one experimental unit within each group or block. The block may be a plot of land, a single occasion in which the experiment was performed, or a human subject. The ‘blocking’ is designed to remove an aspect of the error variation and increase the ‘power’ of the experiment. If there is no significant source of variation associated with the ‘blocking’ then there is a disadvantage to the two-way design because there is a reduction in the DF of the error term compared with a fully randomised design thus reducing the ‘power’ of the analysis.",
keywords = "ANOVA",
author = "Anthony Hilton and Armstrong, {Richard A.}",
year = "2007",
month = "9",
language = "English",
volume = "2007",
pages = "41--42",
journal = "Microbiologist",
issn = "1479-2699",

}

Hilton, A & Armstrong, RA 2007, 'Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance' Microbiologist, vol. 2007, pp. 41-42.

Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance. / Hilton, Anthony; Armstrong, Richard A.

In: Microbiologist, Vol. 2007, 09.2007, p. 41-42.

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

TY - GEN

T1 - Statnote 10: the two-way analysis of variance

AU - Hilton, Anthony

AU - Armstrong, Richard A.

PY - 2007/9

Y1 - 2007/9

N2 - The two-way design has been variously described as a matched-sample F-test, a simple within-subjects ANOVA, a one-way within-groups ANOVA, a simple correlated-groups ANOVA, and a one-factor repeated measures design! This confusion of terminology is likely to lead to problems in correctly identifying this analysis within commercially available software. The essential feature of the design is that each treatment is allocated by randomization to one experimental unit within each group or block. The block may be a plot of land, a single occasion in which the experiment was performed, or a human subject. The ‘blocking’ is designed to remove an aspect of the error variation and increase the ‘power’ of the experiment. If there is no significant source of variation associated with the ‘blocking’ then there is a disadvantage to the two-way design because there is a reduction in the DF of the error term compared with a fully randomised design thus reducing the ‘power’ of the analysis.

AB - The two-way design has been variously described as a matched-sample F-test, a simple within-subjects ANOVA, a one-way within-groups ANOVA, a simple correlated-groups ANOVA, and a one-factor repeated measures design! This confusion of terminology is likely to lead to problems in correctly identifying this analysis within commercially available software. The essential feature of the design is that each treatment is allocated by randomization to one experimental unit within each group or block. The block may be a plot of land, a single occasion in which the experiment was performed, or a human subject. The ‘blocking’ is designed to remove an aspect of the error variation and increase the ‘power’ of the experiment. If there is no significant source of variation associated with the ‘blocking’ then there is a disadvantage to the two-way design because there is a reduction in the DF of the error term compared with a fully randomised design thus reducing the ‘power’ of the analysis.

KW - ANOVA

UR - http://issuu.com/societyforappliedmicrobiology/docs/micro_sept07

M3 - Article

VL - 2007

SP - 41

EP - 42

JO - Microbiologist

JF - Microbiologist

SN - 1479-2699

ER -