David Winsemius
On Feb 13, 2009, at 11:12 PM, Murray Cooper wrote:
> First of all, sorry for my typing mistakes.
>
> Second, the WRS test is most certainly not a test for unequal medians.
> Although under specified models it would be. Just as under specified
> models it can be a test for other measures of location. Perhaps I
> did not
> word my explanation correctly, but I did not mean to imply that it
> would
> be a test of equality of variance. It is plain and simple a test for
> the equality
> of distributions. When the results of a properly applied parametric
> test do
> not agree with the WRS, it is usually do to a difference in the
> empirical
> density function of the two samples.
>
> Murray M Cooper, Ph.D.
> Richland Statistics
> 9800 N 24th St
> Richland, MI, USA 49083
> Mail: richstat at earthlink.net
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Winsemius" <dwinsemius at comcast.net
> >
> To: "Murray Cooper" <myrmail at earthlink.net>
> Cc: "Charlotta Rylander" <zcr at nilu.no>; <r-help at r-project.org>
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 9:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [R] Bootstrap or Wilcoxons' test?
>
>
>> I must disagree with both this general characterization of the
>> Wilcoxon test and with the specific example offered. First, we
>> ought to spell the author's correctly and then clarify that it is
>> the Wilcoxon rank-sum test that is being considered. Next, the WRS
>> test is a test for differences in the location parameter of
>> independent samples conditional on the samples having been drawn
>> from the same distribution. The WRS test would have no
>> discriminatory power for samples drawn from the same distribution
>> having equal location parameters but only different with respect
>> to unequal dispersion. Look at the formula, for Pete's sake. It
>> summarizes differences in ranking, so it is in fact designed NOT
>> to be sensitive to the spread of the values in the sample. It
>> would have no power, for instance, to test the variances of two
>> samples, both with a mean of 0, and one having a variance of 1
>> with the other having a variance of 3. One can think of the WRS
>> as a test for unequal medians.
>>
>> --
>> David Winsemius, MD. MPH
>> Heritage Laboratories
>>
>>
>> On Feb 13, 2009, at 7:48 PM, Murray Cooper wrote:
>>
>>> Charlotta,
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what you mean when you say simple linear
>>> regression. From your description you have two groups
>>> of people, for which you recorded contaminant concentration.
>>> Thus, I would think you would do something like a t-test to
>>> compare the mean concentration level. Where does the
>>> regression part come in? What are you regressing?
>>>
>>> As for the Wilcoxnin test, it is often thought of as a
>>> nonparametric t-test equivalent. This is only true if the
>>> observations were drawn, from a population with the
>>> same probability distribution. The null hypothesis of
>>> the Wilcoxin test is actually "the observations were
>>> drawn, from the same probability distribution".
>>> Thus if your two samples had say different variances,
>>> there means could be the same, but since the variances
>>> are different, the Wilcoxin could give you a significant result.
>>>
>>> Don't know if this all makes sense, but if you have more
>>> questions, please e-mail your data and a more detailed
>>> description of what analysis you used and I'd be happy
>>> to try and help out.
>>>
>>> Murray M Cooper, Ph.D.
>>> Richland Statistics
>>> 9800 N 24th St
>>> Richland, MI, USA 49083
>>> Mail: richstat at earthlink.net
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlotta Rylander"
>>> <zcr at nilu.no>
>>> To: <r-help at r-project.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 3:24 AM
>>> Subject: [R] Bootstrap or Wilcoxons' test?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm comparing the differences in contaminant concentration
>>>> between 2
>>>> different groups of people ( N=36, N=37). When using a simple
>>>> linear
>>>> regression model I found no differences between groups, but when
>>>> evaluating
>>>> the diagnostic plots of the residuals I found my independent
>>>> variable to
>>>> have deviations from normality (even after log transformation).
>>>> Therefore I
>>>> have used bootstrap on the regression parameters ( R= 1000 &
>>>> R=10000) and
>>>> this confirms my results , i.e., no differences between groups
>>>> ( and the
>>>> distribution is log-normal). However, when using wilcoxons' rank
>>>> sum test on
>>>> the same data set I find differences between groups.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Should I trust the results from bootstrapping or from wilcoxons'
>>>> test?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lotta Rylander
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
>>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>>>> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>>>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________
>>> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
>>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>>> PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>>> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>>
>