Skip Navigation

Biometrika 1964 51(3-4):365-372; doi:10.1093/biomet/51.3-4.365
© 1964 by Biometrika Trust
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ATIQULLAH, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The robustness of the covariance analysis of a one-way classification

M. ATIQULLAH

University of Dacca East Pakistan

The effect of non-normality and the effect of treatment slope interaction in the analysis of covariance is studied. Unlike the analysis of variance F-test the analysis of covariance F-test is found to be appreciably affected by non-normality even in balanced classifications. The degree of sensitivity to non-normality is determined by the distribution of the concomitant variables. The violation of the assumption of no treatment-slope interaction does not seem to have serious effect on the F-test in large samples, but a much more serious effect appears to be that of a quadratic component of regression on the F-test.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
R. R. Wilcox
An Approach to Ancova that Allows Multiple Covariates, Nonlinearity, and Heteroscedasticity
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 2005; 65(3): 442 - 450.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
M. Harwell
Summarizing Monte Carlo Results in Methodological Research: The Single-Factor, Fixed-Effects ANCOVA Case
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 2003; 28(1): 45 - 70.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci.Home page
S. A. Neargarder, E. R. Stone, A. Cronin-Golomb, and S. Oross III
The Impact of Acuity on Performance of Four Clinical Measures of Contrast Sensitivity in Alzheimer's Disease
J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., January 1, 2003; 58(1): P54 - 62.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
C. S. Reichardt, W. M.K. Trochim, and J. C. Cappelleri
Reports of the Death of Regression-Discontinuity Analysis are Greatly Exaggerated
Eval Rev, February 1, 1995; 19(1): 39 - 63.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
Y.-W. B. Wu
The Effects of Heterogeneous Regression Slopes on the Robustness of Two Test Statistics in the Analysis of Covariance
Educational and Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1984; 44(3): 647 - 663.
[Abstract]


Home page
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
S. F. Olejnik and J. Algina
Parametric ANCOVA and the Rank Transform ANCOVA When the Data are Conditionally Non-Normal and Heteroscedastic
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1984; 9(2): 129 - 149.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
H. H. Hollingsworth
An Analytical Investigation of the Effects of Heterogeneous Regression Slopes in Analysis of Covariance
Educational and Psychological Measurement, October 1, 1980; 40(3): 611 - 618.
[Abstract]


Home page
REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHHome page
G. V Glass, P. D. Peckham, and J. R. Sanders
Consequences of Failure to Meet Assumptions Underlying the Fixed Effects Analyses of Variance and Covariance
Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1972; 42(3): 237 - 288.
[PDF]


Home page
Am Educ Res JHome page
J. D. Elashoff
Analysis of Covariance: A Delicate Instrument
American Educational Research Journal, May 1, 1969; 6(3): 383 - 401.
[PDF]


Home page
Am Educ Res JHome page
J. C. Stanley
A Common Class of Pseudo-Experiments
American Educational Research Journal, March 1, 1966; 3(2): 79 - 87.
[PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.