The Tukey multiple comparison statistic was compared for Monte Carlo Type II errors under numerous parametric specifications defined by Cohen (1969) as being representative of behavioral research data. It was found that variance heterogeneity, unequal group size, non-normality and positively and negatively related pairings of unequal group size with unequal variances, has but a slight effect on the empirical per comparison probabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Box, G.E.P.Some theorems on quadratic forms applied in the study of analysis of variance problems. I. Effect of inequality of variances in the one-way classification. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1954, 25, 290-302.
2.
Box, G.E.P. and Muller, M.A note on the generation of random normal deviates. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1958, 29, 611.
3.
Cohen, J.Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press , 1969.
4.
Donaldson, T. S.Robustness of the F-test to errors of both kinds and the correlation between the numerator and denominator of the F-ratio. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 1968, 63, 660-676.
5.
Glass, G. V, Peckham, P. D., and Sanders, J. R.Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the fixed effects analysis of variance and covariance. Review of Educational Research , 1972, 42, 237-288.
6.
Glass, G. V, and Stanley, J. C.Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970.
7.
IBM. 360 Scientific Subroutine Package (360A-CM-03X) Programmer's Manual, H20-0205, 1970. International Business Machines Corporation.
8.
Keselman, H. J.The statistic with the smaller critical value. Psychological Bulletin, 1974 , 81, 130-131.
9.
Keselman, H. J. and Murray, R.Tukey tests for pairwise contrasts following the analysis of variance: Is there a Type IV error?Psychological Bulletin , 1974, 81, 608-609.
10.
Keselman, H. J. and Toothaker, L. E.Error rates for multiple comparison methods: Some evidence concerning the misleading conclusions of Petrinovich and Hardyck . Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 31-32.
11.
Keselman, H. J., Toothaker, L. E., and Shooter, M.The harmonic mean and Kramer unequal n forms of the Tukey statistic . Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 1973.
12.
Kramer, C. Y.Extension of multiple range test to group means with unequal numbers of replications. Biometrics, 1956, 12, 307-310.
13.
Lehman, R. S. and Bailey, D. E.Digital computing, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968.
14.
Miller, R. G., Jr.Simultaneous statistical inference. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1966.
15.
Petrinovich, L. R. and Hardyck, C. D.Error rates for multiple comparison methods: Some evidence concerning the frequency of erroneous conclusions. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 71, 43-54.
16.
Ramseyer, G. C. and Tcheng, T.The robustness of the studentized range statistic to violations of the normality and homogeneity of variance assumptions. American Educational Research Journal, 1973, 10, 235-240.
17.
Scheffé, H.The analysis of variance, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1959.
18.
Smith, R. A.The effect of unequal group size on Tukey's HSD procedure. Psychometrika, 1971 , 36, 31-34.
19.
Tukey, J. W.The problem of multiple comparisons . Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University, 1953.
