{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Of the average pulse rates at kmn and ks the data are

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
of the average pulse rates at KMN and KS: The data are compatible with a geographic trend. (b) 9 * 8 / 2 = 36 comparisons. (c) The honest significant difference from Tukey’s method is d HSD = 5 . 21 * 567 * 1 / 15 = 1 . 013. (using k = 9 groups and df Error 120 in the table). The observed difference between KW1 and KW2 is 0 . 18, which is smaller than d HSD . Therefore, no: KW1 and KW2 would not be declared to have significantly different means. (d) = α * = . 01 / 36 then α * / 2 . 00014 on each side, for 2-sided pair-wise comparisons. (e) Fisher’s least significant difference is d LSD = 2 . 62 * 567 * 2 / 15 = . 72, which is smaller than d HSD = 1 . 013. So any pair of locations whose average difference is between . 72 and 1 . 01 would be de- clared significant based on Fisher’s LSD, but non- significant based on Tukey’s HSD. KMN - KW1 = . 92 is such a pair. (f) Bonferroni is the most appropriate in this case, because it has the lowest type I error rate. There will be few significant comparisons with this method (which is okay with the follow-up study), but of these, we should be very confident that they are real (which is highly desirable for the follow-up study). 1
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}