At 11:08 AM 5/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
>On Wed, 17 May 2000 01:57:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> < snip, stuff from previous response. About F-max >
>
> >... And finally could one say that there
> > is a "significant" difference in heteroscedasticity between the "A"
> > sam
On Wed, 17 May 2000 01:57:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
< snip, stuff from previous response. About F-max >
>... And finally could one say that there
> is a "significant" difference in heteroscedasticity between the "A"
> samples than the "B" samples based soley on the diff
I'm truly amazed finding people who still want to use Hartley's test. If
you REALLY REALLY have to test for equality of variances, your best bet is
Levene's test (with sample median). Go to
http://www.recursive-partitioning.com/hov
for software. The manual lists as a reference our paper tha
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What you do mean when you say, "I have two groups of samples"?
> How does this differ from having one large group of samples?
>
> Hartley's will *always* take into account the respective means, in
> the sense that the variance are
On Tue, 16 May 2000 15:21:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is it possible to compare two unrelated groups of samples using
> Hartley's F-max? In other words if I have two groups of samples, can I
> use Hartley's F-max to compare their "heterogeneity" without taking
> into account their respect
Is it possible to compare two unrelated groups of samples using
Hartley's F-max? In other words if I have two groups of samples, can I
use Hartley's F-max to compare their "heterogeneity" without taking
into account their respective means?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
