Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re:Re: Re: st: How do I run a 3-way repeated ANOVA?
From
Philip Ender <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re:Re: Re: st: How do I run a 3-way repeated ANOVA?
Date
Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:03:47 -0700
"RAMPL Linn" <[email protected]> wrote:
>When I use this type of notation you suggested to run a 2-way repeated
>Anova
>
>anova y x1##x2 subject
>...
>I get different results for the F-statistics than using
>
>anova y subject x1 / subject#x1 x2 / subject#x2 x1#x2, repeated(x1 x2)
>
>(this command is taken from http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/stat/anova2.html "No between-subjects
>factors with two repeated variables")
This comes down to the way that Kirk conceptualizes error versus the
Winer, Brown, and Michels approach. For Kirk the error term is
subjects nested in x1#x2 while Winer, Brown, and Michels partitions
the nested error component into a number of pieces. This is also the
approach used by SPSS when analyzing the data in the wide form.
In the approach that I suggested, anova y x1##x2 subject, the
residual for the model is just s|x1#x2. In the end, I don't think
this is a matter of right and wrong rather it reflects differences in
how the error is parameterized.
Just to note: the repeated option does not change the model it only
provides additional information should the assumption of compound
symmetry be violated.
Phil
--
Phil Ender
UCLA Statistical Consulting Group
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/