# Talk:Analysis of variance

WikiProject Statistics (Rated C-class, High-importance)

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or join the discussion.

C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Statistics (Rated C-class, High-importance)

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or join the discussion.

C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated C-class, High-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
 C Class
 High Importance
Field: Probability and statistics
One of the 500 most frequently viewed mathematics articles.

## "Fortunately, experience says that high order interactions are rare"

The above sentence is horribly unscientific (it is found in the subsection "ANOVA for multiple factors"), even though a reference is given. Experience with what? Clearly no one has gained experience with all possible topics in which an ANOVA may be used. The text of the reference is not easily accessed, so it is not possible to check under what conditions this "experience" is applicable. I have marked it with a [verification needed] to signal that this claim needs to be modified. While it is relevant to the topic, the sentence as presented is false.

## "It [ANOVA] is conceptually similar to multiple two-sample t-tests, but is less conservative (results in less type I error)"

I think this is either wrong, or needs some clarification. Surely if the multiple t-tests are taken at face value and no correction is applied, then it is they that are less conservative than ANOVA, and not the other way around, as they will result in more type I errors. If 'conservative' here simply means 'producing fewer type I errors', then ANOVA is more conservative than uncorrected multiple t-tests, not less. Right? L T T H U (talk) 11:30, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

## External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Analysis of variance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at `{{Sourcecheck}}`).

Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot 08:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)