Comparing Three Groups

Jelle J. Goeman and Aldo Solari

The American Statistician, 2022, vol. 76, issue 2, 168-176

Abstract: For multiple comparisons in analysis of variance, the practitioners’ handbooks generally advocate standard methods such as Bonferroni, or an F-test followed by Tukey’s honest significant difference method. These methods are known to be suboptimal compared to closed testing procedures, but improved methods can be complex in the general multigroup set-up. In this note, we argue that the case of three-groups is special: with three groups, closed testing procedures are powerful and easy to use. We describe four different closed testing procedures specifically for the three-group set-up. The choice of method should be determined by assessing which of the comparisons are considered primary and which are secondary, as dictated by subject-matter considerations. We describe how all four methods can be used with any standard software.

Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2021.2002188 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:amstat:v:76:y:2022:i:2:p:168-176

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/UTAS20

DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2021.2002188

Access Statistics for this article

The American Statistician is currently edited by Eric Sampson

More articles in The American Statistician from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().