Suppose We Are Trying To Find The Effects Of 3 Categorical V

Suppose We Are Trying To Find The Effects Of 3 Categorical Variables O

Suppose we are trying to find the effects of 3 categorical variables on a numerical response variable. Factor A has a levels, Factor B has b levels, and Factor C has c levels. Consequently, there are a·b·c treatments, leading to a total of g = a·b·c population means. The primary goal is to test the hypothesis: Ho: μ₁ = μ₂ = … = μ_g = μ versus Ha: At least one μ_i ≠ μ, where μ_i represents the ith population mean. To achieve this, we will employ a stepwise testing procedure similar to the one developed for Two-Way ANOVA, but extended to three factors. This process involves formulating and testing seven hypotheses sequentially, moving from broader to more specific hypotheses. If at any step we reject the null hypothesis, we conclude that there is evidence of differences among the means pertinent to that level of analysis and stop testing; if we fail to reject, we proceed to the next hypothesis.

Paper For Above instruction

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) provides a framework for testing hypotheses about the effects of categorical factors on a continuous response variable. While two-way ANOVA examines the interaction between two factors, a three-factor ANOVA extends this framework, allowing for more complex experimental designs involving three categorical variables. The primary objective in this setting is to ascertain whether the population means associated with different combinations of factor levels differ significantly, culminating in testing whether all these means are equal or not.

In the scenario involving three factors—say, Factors A, B, and C with levels a, b, and c respectively—the total number of treatment combinations is g = a·b·c. For each of these treatments, there exists a population mean μ_i, and the overarching null hypothesis posits that all these means are equal to a common mean μ, indicating no treatment effect variation.

Formulating the hypotheses involves several nested conditions, each testing specific effects or interactions. The initial hypotheses test the highest-level effects, such as the overall treatment effect, followed by lower-order effects and interaction effects. These hypotheses include:

• H₀₁: All treatment means are equal (μ₁=μ₂=...=μ_g).
• H₀₂: All main effects are equal, i.e., the main effect of Factor A is zero (no A effect).
• H₀₃: All main effects of Factor B are zero.
• H₀₄: All main effects of Factor C are zero.
• H₀₅: The two-way interactions between Factors A and B are absent.
• H₀₆: The two-way interactions between Factors A and C are absent.
• H₀₇: The two-way interactions between Factors B and C are absent.

Each hypothesis is tested sequentially, starting from the most comprehensive (the overall treatment effect) down to the specific interaction effects. The test proceeds as follows:

1. Begin by testing the null hypothesis that all treatment means are equal (H₀₁). If this hypothesis is rejected, it indicates the presence of differences among at least some treatment means, and the analysis concludes that not all treatment effects are identical.
2. If H₀₁ is not rejected, then proceed to test for the main effect of Factor A (H₀₂). A rejection suggests that Factor A has a significant effect on the response.
3. If H₀₂ is not rejected, test the main effect of Factor B (H₀₃).
4. If H₀₃ is not rejected, test the main effect of Factor C (H₀₄).
5. Next, test for the interaction between Factors A and B (H₀₅). Rejection suggests a significant interaction, implying that the effect of Factor A depends on the level of Factor B.
6. If H₀₅ is not rejected, test for the interaction between Factors A and C (H₀₆).
7. Finally, if previous interactions are insignificant, test for the interaction between Factors B and C (H₀₇).

This sequential testing method, known as stepwise ANOVA, ensures a systematic evaluation of the effects and their interactions, with each step dependent on the results of the previous tests. If at any stage a null hypothesis is rejected, this indicates the presence of significant differences or interactions, prompting further analysis or interpretation of specific effects.

In conclusion, the three-factor ANOVA analysis involves a sequence of hypotheses testing the overall treatment effects, main effects, and interactions. It allows researchers to identify not only whether there are any significant differences but also which factors or interactions contribute to variability in the response. This structured approach helps in dissecting complex experimental data and making informed conclusions about the effects of multiple categorical variables.

References

• Gomez, J., & Gomez, C. (2010). Analysis of Variance: Designing and Analyzing Experiments. CRC Press.
• Glass, G. V., & Hopkins, K. D. (1996). Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. Longman.
• Montgomery, D. C. (2017). Design and Analysis of Experiments. Wiley.
• Hogg, R. V., McKean, J., & Craig, A. T. (2013). Introduction to Mathematical Statistics. Pearson.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson.
• Lehmann, E. L., & Romano, J. P. (2005). Testing Statistical Hypotheses. Springer.
• Weisberg, S. (2005). Applied Linear Regression. Wiley.
• Maxwell, S. E., & Delaney, H. D. (2004). Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data. Psychology Press.
• Ostle, A. G., & Ostle, N. (2012). Statistical Inference: A Minimum Norm Method. Springer.
• Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied Linear Statistical Models. McGraw-Hill.