Friday, September 19. 2008

What Good Are Error Bars?


Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

The original blog post says “Standard errors are typically smaller than confidence intervals.” Assuming these are all normal distributions (not stated, but I think assumed), isn’t it true that CI are always greater than the std.err. of the mean. I was thinking that the std.err. of the mean was the Std.Dev. of the population of the means of many samples (which is estimated from the data); and that the 95% CI would therefore be a multiple (approx 2 sigma) of the std.err?
#1 Don Gregory on 2008-09-22 17:00 (Reply)
I agree that the 95% confidence interval will be wider than an interval of one standard error because the critical t value for alpha=0.05 will always be greater than 1. However, if you required less confidence, the multiplier might be less than one. For example, if you only required 60% when comparing the means from two populations with a sample of 3 from each, your multiplier is only 0.94. This case is not likely, however.

#1.1 Mark Bailey on 2008-09-30 12:56 (Reply)
Also, the blog post author mentions that with correlated samples, error bars are inappropriate. I can understand the requirement that two ‘samples’ be independent for anova, but if “before” vs “after” measurements are not suitable, then I think there is a whole bunch of folks using the anova platform (with compare means) incorrectly?
I think there are a lot of folks who are using it for just that purpose; so the question is, if that’s not right, what’s the ‘correct’ way to evaluate a significance of a ‘before’ and ‘after’ set of measurements?
#2 Don Gregory on 2008-09-22 17:01 (Reply)
This is another case where the comparison involved paired observations. In this case, if the observations are highly correlated or the variation between blocks is large, then the confidence interval of the sample averages will be greater than confidence interval for the paired differences. This case happens frequently. Unfortunately, many investigators do not recognized the pairing and use the less powerful two-sample test of the mean.

Once again, JMP provides a better solution: Analyze > Matched Pairs, if you recognize the pairing.
#2.1 Mark Bailey on 2008-09-30 14:38 (Reply)
I'm a long time jump user but just recently found this blog. I want to say that posts such as this one are most interesting.

I would love to see more posts on specific statistical issues/problems and how JMP addresses those.
#3 dave (Homepage) on 2008-10-17 10:03 (Reply)
Your comment is much appreciated. Help us to help you! You (and any other reader) are welcome to suggest topics that might not occur to us or to indicate that a given topic should be a priority for us to cover here.

Again, thanks for your comments!
#3.1 Mark Bailey on 2008-11-24 10:35 (Reply)
This was a good discussion of the error bars and the tools in JMP for making comparisons. I have two questions that are more for information or education. First, are there any references on the construction of the overlap regions of the diamonds? Second, the letter assignments can be confusing to interpret, so are there any guidelines for interpretation? For instance, are they transitive so that if X does not differ from Y and Y does not differ from Z, then does X not differ from Z?
#4 Walter R. Paczkowski on 2008-12-23 23:55 (Reply)
There is information about how the overlap marks in the means diamonds are computed. Refer to the JMP Statistics & Graphics Guide in the Chapter 7, which is all about the Oneway platform. (The reference manuals are available as PDF documents through the Help > Books menu.) See the section Means Diamonds and x-Axis Proportional in this chapter for more details.

Your transitivity example is not necessarily true, and I have seen exceptions to it. The letter groupings are meant to ease the interpretation of significant differences among the means for different levels. The letter designations work on the same principles as the underlying multiple comparison method upon which they are based. Simply put, if two groups share the same letter, then they are not signficantly different at the designated level. Otherwise, if two groups are assigned different letters, then they are signficantly different at the designated level. Some levels may be assigned to more than one letter.
#4.1 Mark Bailey on 2009-01-21 13:47 (Reply)
Does anyone know how I can add error bars on a bar graph in JMP?
#5 Florian on 2009-03-27 11:41 (Reply)
Please see the answer added at the bottom of the blog entry.
#5.1 Mark Bailey on 2009-03-30 13:30 (Reply)
Helpful information. Thank you very much.
#6 Anger Management (Homepage) on 2009-12-30 05:54 (Reply)

Add Comment

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA 1CAPTCHA 2CAPTCHA 3CAPTCHA 4CAPTCHA 5


 

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.
 

The blog content appearing on this site does not necessarily represent the opinions of SAS. Your use of this blog is governed by the Terms of Use.

Quicksearch

Calendar

Back February '10 Forward
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
2 3 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28