On Thu, 24 Jun 2010, Atte Tenkanen wrote:
On Jun 23, 2010, at 9:58 PM, Atte Tenkanen wrote:
Thanks. What I have had to ask is that
how do you test that the data is symmetric enough?
If it is not, is it ok to use some data transformation?
when it is said:
"The Wilcoxon signed rank test does not assume that the data are
sampled from a Gaussian distribution. However it does assume that
the data are distributed symmetrically around the median. If the
distribution is asymmetrical, the P value will not tell you much
about whether the median is different than the hypothetical value."
You are being misled. Simply finding a statement on a statistics
software website, even one as reputable as Graphpad (???), does not
mean that it is necessarily true. My understanding (confirmed
reviewing "Nonparametric statistical methods for complete and censored
data" by M. M. Desu, Damaraju Raghavarao, is that the Wilcoxon signed-
rank test does not require that the underlying distributions be
symmetric. The above quotation is highly inaccurate.
--
David.
Thanks. Unfortunately, I can't follow the reference at all, but I read this in
that way that I can be carefree as far as the underlying distribution is
concerned?
Is there any other authoritative reference where that is just stated in a way "test
does not require that the underlying distributions be symmetric or normal".
The statement from GraphPad is correct, but for a different question. Let me
expound.
First let us consider means:
If you have paired samples X1.. Xn and Y1..Yn you could ask if the mean of X is
equal to the mean of Y, or if the mean of (X-Y) is zero. These are equivalent
questions, because of the way the mean is defined. So the paired t-test,
which answers the first question, and the one-sample t-test, which answers the
second question, are equivalent. They have no assumptions (other than
sufficient sample size for the means to be Normally distributed).
Now, let us consider medians.
f you have paired samples X1.. Xn and Y1..Yn you could ask if the median of X
is equal to the median of Y, or if the median of (X-Y) is zero. The first
question can be answered by any standard test (though there are ways to do it).
The second is answered by the sign test. They are not at all equivalent: it
is possible for the median of X to be larger than the median of Y but the
median of (X-Y) to be negative. The non-equivalence is true for essentially
all statistics except for the mean.
Now, let us consider the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
This can be characterized precisely as a test of the null hypothesis that the
median pairwise mean of X-Y is zero. That is, take all n(n-1)/2 pairs of
(X-Y)s. Take the mean of each pair to get n(n-1)/2 pairwise means. Take the
median of these numbers. The p-value will be 0.5 one-sided or 1.0 two-sided
when this median pairwise mean is exactly zero. The median pairwise mean is
also sometimes known as the Hodges-Lehmann estimator (though this is strictly
speaking a more general term).
As David correctly points out, no assumptions are needed for the Wilcoxon signed-rank
test to be a test of *this* null hypothesis. The problem is that this may not be the
null hypothesis you care about. As GraphPad correctly points out, "the P value will
not tell you much about whether the *median* is different than the hypothetical
value" because the median is not the same as the median pairwise mean. It is
entirely possible for the median difference to be positive and the median pairwise mean
difference to be zero or negative.
If you assume that the distribution of differences X-Y is symmetric, then the
Wilcoxon signed-rank test also tests the null hypothesis that the median of X-Y
is zero (and that the mean of X-Y is zero), because these null hypotheses are
equivalent for a symmetric distribution. That's what GraphPad is saying
You could also assume that the distributions X and Y are stochastically
ordered. This basically implies that the direction of difference is the same
no matter what location statistic you use to measure it. If X was before some
intervention and Y was afterwards you would basically be assuming that the
intervention is either beneficial for everyone or harmful for everyone (up to
measurement error). Under this assumption, the signed rank test also tells you
reliably about differences in medians.
To some extent this is a philosophical issue. My preference is to know exactly
what a test is doing and to make these distinctions. Many other people,
including reputable experts like Frank Harrell, believe (I think) that
simplifying assumptions such as stochastic ordering are a pretty good
approximation in a lot of situations, so it isn't necessary to always make
these distinctions.
-thomas
Thomas Lumley Assoc. Professor, Biostatistics
tlum...@u.washington.edu University of Washington, Seattle
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
