Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

5,325 views

Published on

one way analysis of variance and two way analysis of variance with case study

No Downloads

Total views

5,325

On SlideShare

0

From Embeds

0

Number of Embeds

186

Shares

0

Downloads

455

Comments

0

Likes

8

No embeds

No notes for slide

- 1. Analysis of Variance<br />
- 2. Introduction <br />Analysis of variance compares two or more populations of interval data.<br />Specifically, we are interested in determining whether differences exist between the population means.<br />The procedure works by analyzing the sample variance.<br />
- 3. One Way Analysis of Variance <br />The analysis of variance is a procedure that tests to determine whether differences exits between two or more population means.<br />To do this, the technique analyzes the sample variances<br />
- 4. One Way Analysis of Variance <br />Example<br />An apple juice manufacturer is planning to develop a new product -a liquid concentrate.<br />The marketing manager has to decide how to market the new product.<br />Three strategies are considered<br />Emphasize convenience of using the product.<br />Emphasize the quality of the product.<br />Emphasize the product’s low price.<br />
- 5. One Way Analysis of Variance <br />Example continued<br />An experiment was conducted as follows:<br />In three cities an advertisement campaign was launched .<br />In each city only one of the three characteristics (convenience, quality, and price) was emphasized.<br />The weekly sales were recorded for twenty weeks following the beginning of the campaigns.<br />
- 6. One Way Analysis of Variance<br />Weekly sales<br />Weekly sales<br />Weekly sales<br />
- 7. One Way Analysis of Variance <br />Solution<br />The data are interval<br />The problem objective is to compare sales in three cities.<br />We hypothesize that the three population means are equal<br />
- 8. <ul><li>Solution</li></ul>H0: m1 = m2= m3<br />H1: At least two means differ<br /> To build the statistic needed to test thehypotheses use the following notation:<br />Defining the Hypotheses<br />
- 9. 1<br />2<br />k<br />First observation,<br />first sample<br />Second observation,<br />second sample<br />Independent samples are drawn from k populations (treatments).<br />X11<br />x21<br />.<br />.<br />.<br />Xn1,1<br />X12<br />x22<br />.<br />.<br />.<br />Xn2,2<br />X1k<br />x2k<br />.<br />.<br />.<br />Xnk,k<br />Sample size<br />Sample mean<br />X is the “response variable”.<br />The variables’ value are called “responses”.<br />Notation<br />
- 10. Terminology<br />In the context of this problem…<br />Response variable – weekly salesResponses – actual sale valuesExperimental unit – weeks in the three cities when we record sales figures.Factor – the criterion by which we classify the populations (the treatments). In this problems the factor is the marketing strategy.<br />Factor levels – the population (treatment) names. In this problem factor levels are the marketing strategies.<br />
- 11. Two types of variability are employed when testing for the equality of the population means<br />The rationale of the test statistic <br />
- 12. Graphical demonstration:<br />Employing two types of variability<br />
- 13. 30<br />25<br />20<br />19<br />12<br />10<br />9<br />7<br />1<br />Treatment 3<br />Treatment 1<br />Treatment 2<br />20<br />16<br />15<br />14<br />11<br />10<br />9<br />The sample means are the same as before,<br />but the larger within-sample variability <br />makes it harder to draw a conclusion<br />about the population means.<br />A small variability within<br />the samples makes it easier<br />to draw a conclusion about the <br />population means. <br />Treatment 1<br />Treatment 2<br />Treatment 3<br />
- 14. The rationale behind the test statistic – I <br />If the null hypothesis is true, we would expect all the sample means to be close to one another (and as a result, close to the grand mean).<br />If the alternative hypothesis is true, at least some of the sample means would differ.<br />Thus, we measure variability between sample means. <br />
- 15. <ul><li>The variability between the sample means is measured as the sum of squared distances between each mean and the grand mean.</li></ul>This sum is called the <br />Sum of Squares for Treatments<br />SST<br />In our example treatments are<br />represented by the different<br />advertising strategies.<br />Variability between sample means<br />
- 16. There are k treatments<br />The mean of sample j<br />The size of sample j <br />Sum of squares for treatments (SST)<br />Note: When the sample means are close toone another, their distance from the grand <br />mean is small, leading to a small SST. Thus, <br />large SST indicates large variation between <br />sample means, which supports H1.<br />
- 17. Solution – continuedCalculate SST <br />= 20(577.55 - 613.07)2 + <br />+ 20(653.00 - 613.07)2 + <br />+ 20(608.65 - 613.07)2 =<br />= 57,512.23<br />The grand mean is calculated by <br />Sum of squares for treatments (SST)<br />
- 18. Large variability within the samples weakens the “ability” of the sample means to represent their corresponding population means. <br />Therefore, even though sample means may markedly differ from one another, SST must be judged relative to the “within samples variability”. <br />The rationale behind test statistic – II <br />
- 19. The variability within samples is measured by adding all the squared distances between observations and their sample means.<br />This sum is called the <br />Sum of Squares for Error <br />SSE<br />In our example this is the <br />sum of all squared differences<br />between sales in city j and the<br />sample mean of city j (over all <br />the three cities).<br />Within samples variability <br />
- 20. Solution – continuedCalculate SSE<br /> Sum of squares for errors (SSE) <br />= (n1 - 1)s12 + (n2 -1)s22 + (n3 -1)s32<br />= (20 -1)10,774.44 + (20 -1)7,238.61+ (20-1)8,670.24 <br />= 506,983.50<br />
- 21. To perform the test we need to calculate the mean squaresas follows:<br />The mean sum of squares <br />Calculation of MST - <br />Mean Square for Treatments <br />Calculation of MSE<br />Mean Square for Error<br />
- 22. Calculation of the test statistic <br />Required Conditions:<br />1. The populations tested<br /> are normally distributed.<br />2. The variances of all the<br /> populations tested are<br /> equal.<br />with the following degrees of freedom:<br />v1=k -1 and v2=n-k<br />
- 23. H0: m1 = m2 = …=mk<br />H1: At least two means differ<br />Test statistic: <br />R.R: F>Fa,k-1,n-k<br />the hypothesis test:<br />And finally<br />The F test rejection region <br />
- 24. The F test<br /> Ho: m1 = m2= m3<br /> H1: At least two means differ <br /> Test statistic F= MST/ MSE= 3.23<br />Since 3.23 > 3.15, there is sufficient evidence <br />to reject Ho in favor of H1,and argue that at least one <br />of the mean sales is different than the others.<br />
- 25. single factor ANOVA<br />SS(Total) = SST + SSE<br />
- 26. Fixed effects<br />If all possible levels of a factor are included in our analysis we have a fixed effect ANOVA.<br />The conclusion of a fixed effect ANOVA applies only to the levels studied.<br />Random effects<br />If the levels included in our analysis represent a random sample of all the possible levels, we have a random-effect ANOVA.<br />The conclusion of the random-effect ANOVA applies to all the levels (not only those studied).<br />Models of Fixed and Random Effects<br />
- 27. In some ANOVA models the test statistic of the fixed effects case may differ from the test statistic of the random effect case.<br />Fixed and random effects - examples<br />Fixed effects - The advertisement Example .All the levels of the marketing strategies were included <br />Random effects - To determine if there is a difference in the production rate of 50 machines, four machines are randomly selected and there production recorded.<br />Models of Fixed and Random Effects.<br />
- 28. Two Way Analysis of Variance<br />
- 29. One - way ANOVA<br />Single factor<br />Two - way ANOVA<br />Two factors<br />Response<br />Response<br />Treatment 3 (level 1)<br /> Treatment 2 (level 2)<br />Treatment 1 (level 3)<br />Level 3<br />Level2<br />Factor A<br />Level 1<br />Level 1<br />Level2<br />Factor B<br />
- 30. Two-Factor Analysis of Variance -<br />Example<br />Suppose in the Example, two factors are to be examined:<br />The effects of the marketing strategy on sales.<br />Emphasis on convenience<br />Emphasis on quality<br />Emphasis on price<br />The effects of the selected media on sales.<br />Advertise on TV<br />Advertise in newspapers <br />
- 31. Attempting one-way ANOVA<br />Solution<br />We may attempt to analyze combinations of levels, one from each factor using one-way ANOVA.<br />The treatments will be:<br />Treatment 1: Emphasize convenience and advertise in TV<br />Treatment 2: Emphasize convenience and advertise in newspapers<br />…………………………………………………………………….<br />Treatment 6: Emphasize price and advertise in newspapers<br />
- 32. Attempting one-way ANOVA<br />Solution<br />The hypotheses tested are:<br />H0: m1= m2= m3= m4= m5= m6<br />H1: At least two means differ.<br />
- 33. Attempting one-way ANOVA<br /><ul><li>Solution
- 34. In each one of six cities sales are recorded for ten weeks.
- 35. In each city a different combination of marketing emphasis and media usage is employed. </li></ul>City1City2City3City4City5City6Convnce Convnce Quality Quality Price Price<br /> TV Paper TV Paper TV Paper<br />
- 36. City1City2City3City4City5City6Convnce Convnce Quality Quality Price Price<br /> TV Paper TV Paper TV Paper<br />Attempting one-way ANOVA<br />Solution<br /><ul><li> The p-value =.0452.
- 37. We conclude that there is evidence that differences exist in the mean weekly sales among the six cities.</li></li></ul><li>Interesting questions – no answers<br />These result raises some questions:<br />Are the differences in sales caused by the different marketing strategies?<br />Are the differences in sales caused by the different media used for advertising?<br />Are there combinations of marketing strategy and media that interact to affect the weekly sales?<br />
- 38. The current experimental design cannot provide answers to these questions.<br />A new experimental design is needed.<br />Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />
- 39. Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />Factor A: Marketing strategy<br />Factor B: <br />Advertising media<br />Convenience<br />Quality<br />Price<br />City 1<br />sales<br />City3<br />sales<br />City 5<br />sales<br />TV<br />City 2<br />sales<br />City 4<br />sales<br />City 6<br />sales<br />Newspapers<br />Are there differences in the mean sales <br />caused by different marketing strategies? <br />
- 40. Calculations are <br />based on the sum of <br />square for factor ASS(A)<br /> Test whether mean sales of “Convenience”, “Quality”, <br /> and “Price” significantly differ from one another. <br /> H0: mConv.= mQuality = mPrice<br />H1: At least two means differ <br />Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />
- 41. Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />Factor A: Marketing strategy<br />Convenience<br />Quality<br />Price<br />City 1<br />sales<br />City 3<br />sales<br />City 5<br />sales<br />TV<br />Factor B: <br />Advertising media<br />City 2<br />sales<br />City 4<br />sales<br />City 6<br />sales<br />Newspapers<br />Are there differences in the mean sales <br />caused by different advertising media? <br />
- 42. Calculations are based onthe sum of square for factor BSS(B)<br />Test whether mean sales of the “TV”, and “Newspapers” significantly differ from one another. H0: mTV = mNewspapers<br />H1: The means differ <br />Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />
- 43. Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />Quality<br />TV<br />Factor A: Marketing strategy<br />Convenience<br />Quality<br />Price<br />City 1<br />sales<br />City 5<br />sales<br />City 3<br />sales<br />TV<br />Factor B: <br />Advertising media<br />City 2<br />sales<br />City 4<br />sales<br />City 6<br />sales<br />Newspapers<br />Are there differences in the mean sales <br />caused by interaction between marketing <br />strategy and advertising medium? <br />
- 44. Test whether mean sales of certain cells <br /> are different than the level expected.<br />Calculation are based on the sum of square for interaction SS(AB)<br />Two-way ANOVA (two factors)<br />
- 45. Sums of squares<br />
- 46. MS(A)<br />MSE<br />MS(B)<br />MSE<br />MS(AB)<br />MSE<br />F= <br />F= <br />F= <br />F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Test for the difference between the levels of the main factors A and B<br />SS(A)/(a-1)<br />SS(B)/(b-1)<br />SSE/(n-ab)<br />Rejection region: F > Fa,a-1 ,n-ab F > Fa, b-1, n-ab<br /><ul><li>Test for interaction between factors A and B</li></ul>SS(AB)/(a-1)(b-1)<br />Rejection region: F > Fa,(a-1)(b-1),n-ab<br />
- 47. Required conditions:<br />The response distributions is normal<br />The treatment variances are equal.<br />The samples are independent.<br />
- 48. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />
- 49. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Example – continued<br />Test of the difference in mean sales between the three marketing strategies<br />H0: mconv. = mquality = mprice<br />H1: At least two mean sales are different<br />Factor A Marketing strategies<br />
- 50. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Example – continued<br />Test of the difference in mean sales between the three marketing strategies<br />H0: mconv. = mquality = mprice<br />H1: At least two mean sales are different<br />F = MS(Marketing strategy)/MSE = 5.33 <br /> Fcritical = Fa,a-1,n-ab = F.05,3-1,60-(3)(2) = 3.17; (p-value = .0077)<br />At 5% significance level there is evidence to infer that differences in weekly sales exist among the marketing strategies.<br />MS(A)/MSE<br />
- 51. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Example - continued<br />Test of the difference in mean sales between the two advertising media<br />H0: mTV. = mNespaper<br />H1: The two mean sales differ<br />Factor B = Advertising media<br />
- 52. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Example - continued<br />Test of the difference in mean sales between the two advertising media<br />H0: mTV. = mNespaper<br />H1: The two mean sales differ<br />F = MS(Media)/MSE = 1.42 <br /> Fcritical = Fa,a-1,n-ab = F.05,2-1,60-(3)(2) = 4.02 (p-value = .2387)<br />At 5% significance level there is insufficient evidence to infer that differences in weekly sales exist between the two advertising media.<br />MS(B)/MSE<br />
- 53. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Example - continued<br />Test for interaction between factors A and B<br />H0: mTV*conv. = mTV*quality =…=mnewsp.*price<br />H1: At least two means differ<br />Interaction AB = Marketing*Media<br />
- 54. F tests for the Two-way ANOVA<br />Example - continued<br />Test for interaction between factor A and B<br />H0: mTV*conv. = mTV*quality =…=mnewsp.*price<br />H1: At least two means differ<br />F = MS(Marketing*Media)/MSE = .09 <br /> Fcritical = Fa,(a-1)(b-1),n-ab = F.05,(3-1)(2-1),60-(3)(2) = 3.17 (p-value= .9171)<br />At 5% significance level there is insufficient evidence to infer that the two factors interact to affect the mean weekly sales.<br />MS(AB)/MSE<br />
- 55. JyothimonC<br />M.Tech Technology Management<br />University of Kerala<br />Send your feedbacks and queries to<br />jyothimonc@yahoo.com <br />

No public clipboards found for this slide

×
### Save the most important slides with Clipping

Clipping is a handy way to collect and organize the most important slides from a presentation. You can keep your great finds in clipboards organized around topics.

Be the first to comment