A two-sample test

In certain investigations involving an experimental group and a control group, the effect of the experimental treatment may be expected to manifest itself by increasing the scores of some subjects but by decreasing the scores of other subjects. Examples arise in the area of defensive behavior. Customary tests of differences between means are inappropriate for assessing the existence of effect of the experimental treatment in such cases. A test based on the ranks of the observations is proposed; it will be sensitive to extreme scores (either large or small or both) for experimentals.     

The new and improved two-sample T test

Abstract This article considers the problem of comparing two independent groups in terms of some measure of location. It is well known that with Student's two-independent-sample t test, the actual level of significance can be well above or below the nominal level, confidence intervals can have inaccurate probability coverage, and power can be low relative to other methods. A solution to deal with heterogeneity is Welch's (1938) test. Welch's test deals with heteroscedasticity but can have poor power under arbitrarily small departures from normality. Yuen (1974) generalized Welch's test to trimmed means; her method provides improved control over the probability of a Type I error, but problems remain. Transformations for skewness improve matters, but the probability of a Type I error remains unsatisfactory in some situations. We find that a transformation for skewness combined with a bootstrap method improves Type I error control and probability coverage even if sample sizes are small.     

A nonparametric method to analyze interactions: The adjusted rank transform test

Experimental social psychologists routinely rely on ANOVA to study interactions between factors even when the assumptions underlying the use of parametric tests are not met. Alternative nonparametric methods are often relatively difficult to conduct, have seldom been presented into detail in regular curriculum and have the reputation - sometimes incorrectly - of being less powerful than parametric tests. This article presents the adjusted rank transform test (ART); a nonparametric test, easy to conduct, having the advantage of being much more powerful than parametric tests when certain assumptions underlying the use of these tests are violated. To specify the conditions under which the adjusted rank transform test is superior to the usual parametric tests, results of a Monte Carlo simulation are presented.     

Reliability of test scores in nonparametric item response theory

Three methods for estimating reliability are studied within the context of nonparametric item response theory. Two were proposed originally by Mokken (1971) and a third is developed in this paper. Using a Monte Carlo strategy, these three estimation methods are compared with four classical lower bounds to reliability. Finally, recommendations are given concerning the use of these estimation methods.The authors are grateful for constructive comments from the reviewers and from Charles Lewis.     

A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality

Assuming a nonparametric family of item response theory models, a theory-based procedure for testing the hypothesis of unidimensionality of the latent space is proposed. The asymptotic distribution of the test statistic is derived assuming unidimensionality, thereby establishing an asymptotically valid statistical test of the unidimensionality of the latent trait. Based upon a new notion of dimensionality, the test is shown to have asymptotic power 1. A 6300 trial Monte Carlo study using published item parameter estimates of widely used standardized tests indicates conservative adherence to the nominal level of significance and statistical power averaging 81 out of 100 rejections for examinee sample sizes and psychological test lengths often incurred in practice.The referees' comments were remarkably detailed and greatly enhanced the writeup and sensitized the author to certain pertinent issues. Discussions with Fritz Drasgow, Lloyd Humphreys, Dennis Jennings, Brian Junker, Robert Linn, Ratna Nandakumar, and Robin Shealy were also very useful.This research was supported by the Office of Naval Research under grant N00014-84-K-0186; NR 150-533, and by the National Science Foundation under grant DMS 85-03321.     

A nonparametric procedure for evaluation of true and false positives

A procedure is presented for the evaluation of single-point estimates of true and false positives without strong underlying parametric assumptions. The method is based upon the area operating characteristic and the Green area rule. Estimates of sampling error are also available. The procedure is extended to a strong one-parameter relation between true and false positives.     

A tutorial on Bayesian nonparametric models

A key problem in statistical modeling is model selection, that is, how to choose a model at an appropriate level of complexity. This problem appears in many settings, most prominently in choosing the number of clusters in mixture models or the number of factors in factor analysis. In this tutorial, we describe Bayesian nonparametric methods, a class of methods that side-steps this issue by allowing the data to determine the complexity of the model. This tutorial is a high-level introduction to Bayesian nonparametric methods and contains several examples of their application.     

One-sided nonparametric tests for ordinal data

Baumgartner, Weiss, and Schindler (1998) introduced a novel non-parametric test for the two-sample comparison that is superior to commonly used tests such as the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. A modification of the novel test statistic can be used for one-sided comparisons based on ordinal data. Such comparisons frequently occur in psychological research, and the Wilcoxon test is often recommended for their analysis. Here, the two tests were compared in a simulation study. According to this study the tests have a similar type I error rate, but the modified Baumgartner-Weiss-Schindler test is more powerful than the Wilcoxon test.     

A fixed-population problem for the person-affecting restriction

Philosophical Studies - According to the person-affecting restriction, one distribution of welfare can be better than another only if there is someone for whom it is better. Extant problems for the...     

A distinction between exact and approximate nonparametric methods

Nonparametric tests are discussed in relation to parametric tests. A distinction is made between two types of nonparametric tests. One type leads to an exact significance level, the other to an approximate significance level. The failure to distinguish between these two types has led to confusion and error. Examples are cited.     

Parametric and nonparametric bootstrap methods for meta-analysis

In a meta-analysis, the unknown parameters are often estimated using maximum likelihood, and inferences are based on asymptotic theory. It is assumed that, conditional on study characteristics included in the model, the between-study distribution and the sampling distributions of the effect sizes are normal. In practice, however, samples are finite, and the normality assumption may be violated, possibly resulting in biased estimates and inappropriate standard errors. In this article, we propose two parametric and two nonparametric bootstrap methods that can be used to adjust the results of maximum likelihood estimation in meta-analysis and illustrate them with empirical data. A simulation study, with raw data drawn from normal distributions, reveals that the parametric bootstrap methods and one of the nonparametric methods are generally superior to the ordinary maximum likelihood approach but suffer from a bias/precision tradeoff. We recommend using one of these bootstrap methods, but without applying the bias correction.     

Observed-score equating as a test assembly problem

A set of linear conditions on item response functions is derived that guarantees identical observed-score distributions on two test forms. The conditions can be added as constraints to a linear programming model for test assembly that assembles a new test form to have an observed-score distribution optimally equated to the distribution on an old form. For a well-designed item pool and items fitting the IRT model, use of the model results into observed-score pre-equating and prevents the necessity ofpost hoc equating by a conventional observed-score equating method. An empirical example illustrates the use of the model for an item pool from the Law School Admission Test.The authors are most indebted to Norman D. Verhelst for suggesting Proposition 4 and its proof, to the Law School Admission Council (LSAC) for making available the data set, and to Wim M. M. Tielen for his computational assistance.