Repeated measures ANOVA and adjusted F-tests when sphericity is violated: which procedure is best?
María J. Blanca,Jaume Arnau,F. Javier García-Castro,Rafael Alarcón,Roser Bono
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1192453
IF: 3.8
2023-08-30
Frontiers in Psychology
Abstract:Introduction: One-way repeated measures ANOVA requires sphericity. Research indicates that violation of this assumption has an important impact on Type I error. Although more advanced alternative procedures exist, most classical texts recommend the use of adjusted F -tests, which are frequently employed because they are intuitive, easy to apply, and available in most statistical software. Adjusted F -tests differ in the procedure used to estimate the corrective factor ε , the most common being the Greenhouse-Geisser ( F-GG ) and Huynh-Feldt ( F-HF ) adjustments. Although numerous studies have analyzed the robustness of these procedures, the results are inconsistent, thus highlighting the need for further research. Methods: The aim of this simulation study was to analyze the performance of the F -statistic, F-GG , and F-HF in terms of Type I error and power in one-way designs with normal data under a variety of conditions that may be encountered in real research practice. Values of ε were fixed according to the Greenhouse–Geisser procedure ( ε̂ ). We manipulated the number of repeated measures (3, 4, and 6) and sample size (from 10 to 300), with ε̂ values ranging from the lower to its upper limit. Results: Overall, the results showed that the F -statistic becomes more liberal as sphericity violation increases, whereas both F-HF and F-GG control Type I error; of the two, F-GG is more conservative, especially with large values of ε̂ and small samples. Discussion: If different statistical conclusions follow from application of the two tests, we recommend using F-GG for ε̂ values below 0.60, and F-HF for ε̂ values equal to or above 0.60.
psychology, multidisciplinary