Hypothesis Testing for Multiple Populations: Variances, Correlation, and Multiple Comparisons – STAT, Handout 13 (Part 3 of 3) – Study Notes

Source: Handout #13, Tamhane/Dunlop Ch. 8, Ch. 9, Section 14.2

Tags: Hartley Fmax test, Brown-Forsythe-Levene test, BFL test, homogeneity of variance, equal variance test, von Neumann test, autocorrelation, runs test, serial correlation, Tukey HSD, pairwise comparisons, studentized range, experimentwise error rate, multiple comparisons


TL;DR

Comparing population variances uses Hartley's Fmax test (simple but requires normality and equal sample sizes) or the Brown-Forsythe-Levene test (robust to nonnormality). For checking whether observations are correlated over time, use the von Neumann test (normal data) or the runs test (distribution-free). When comparing more than two population means, the Tukey HSD procedure controls the experimentwise error rate while making all pairwise comparisons.


Key Terms

Hartley's Fmax statistic

Fmax = s²_max / s²_min, the ratio of the largest to smallest sample variance. Requires normal populations and equal sample sizes.

Brown-Forsythe-Levene (BFL) test

A robust test of equal variances based on the absolute deviations of observations from their group medians. Does not require normality or equal sample sizes.

von Neumann ratio (Q)

Q = [Σ(Xₜ − Xₜ₋₁)² / (n−1)] / [Σ(Xₜ − X̄)² / n]. Tests for first-order autocorrelation in normally distributed data. Small Q indicates positive correlation; large Q indicates negative correlation.

First-order autocorrelation (ρ)

The correlation between consecutive observations in a time series: Xₜ = θ + ρXₜ₋₁ + eₜ. When ρ = 0, the observations are independent.

Runs test

A distribution-free test for serial correlation. A run is a consecutive sequence of values all above (or all below) the mean. Too few runs indicates positive correlation; too many indicates negative correlation.

Tukey HSD (Honest Significant Difference)

A multiple comparison procedure based on the studentized range distribution. Controls the experimentwise Type I error rate exactly (not just a bound) when sample sizes are equal.

Studentized range statistic

q(t, ν) = (ȳ_max − ȳ_min) / (σ̂_p √(1/r)). The distribution of the range of t sample means, standardised by the pooled standard error.

Experimentwise error rate (α_Exp)

The probability of making at least one Type I error across all pairwise comparisons. The Tukey HSD controls this at exactly α₀ when sample sizes are equal.


Core Content

Hartley's Fmax Test for Homogeneity of Variances

Conditions:

  • Independent random samples of the same size n from t normally distributed populations

  • This is a strict requirement: Fmax is highly sensitive to nonnormality

Hypotheses:

H₀: σ₁² = σ₂² = ... = σₜ² Hₐ: not all σᵢ² are equal

Test statistic:

Fmax = s²_max / s²_min

Rejection rule: Reject H₀ if Fmax ≥ Fmax,α,t,n−1, using the Fmax percentile table (not the standard F-table).

When t = 2: Fmax has an exact F-distribution with df₁ = n − 1, df₂ = m − 1.

Sensitivity to nonnormality: A simulation with α = .05 shows:

  • Normal: actual error rate stays close to .05

  • Uniform: error rate drops to .004 to .01 (far too conservative)

  • t(df=5): error rate inflates to .12 to .15

  • Gamma(shape=1): error rate inflates to .22 to .26

  • Gamma(shape=0.1): error rate inflates to .67 to .69

The Fmax test detects the nonnormality, not the variance differences. When distributions are nonnormal, use the BFL test instead.


Brown-Forsythe-Levene (BFL) Test

The BFL test works by transforming the data into absolute deviations from group medians, then running a standard ANOVA F-test on these transformed values.

Steps:

  • Compute the median ỹᵢ of each sample

  • Transform each observation: zᵢⱼ = |yᵢⱼ − ỹᵢ|

  • Compute the BFL statistic as an F-ratio on the zᵢⱼ values

Test statistic:

L = [Σᵢ nᵢ(z̄ᵢ. − z̄..)² / (t − 1)] / [ΣΣ(zᵢⱼ − z̄ᵢ.)² / (N − t)]

This is just a one-way ANOVA F-test on the absolute deviations.

Rejection rule: Reject H₀ if L ≥ F(α, t−1, N−t).

Hajek-Sidak modification: When a sample size is odd, exactly one zᵢⱼ will be zero (the observation equal to the median). This artificially dampens the variance. Replace the single zero with the minimum non-zero value within that group. If more than one zᵢⱼ is zero, keep them as zeros.

Advantages over Hartley:

  • Does not require normality

  • Does not require equal sample sizes

  • Recommended by Conover, Johnson, and Johnson (1981) as one of the best procedures

Trade-off: When populations are truly normal, Hartley's test has more power than BFL.

R: leveneTest(y, grp) from the car package, or compute manually via aov(z ~ grp) where z contains the absolute deviations from group medians.

SAS: means group / hovtest=bf in PROC GLM.


von Neumann Test for Autocorrelation

Tests whether observations collected over time are first-order autocorrelated.

Model: Xₜ = θ + ρXₜ₋₁ + eₜ, where eₜ is independent normal noise.

Hypotheses: H₀: ρ = 0 (observations are independent) vs Hₐ: ρ ≠ 0

Test statistic:

Q = [Σₜ₌₂ⁿ (Xₜ − Xₜ₋₁)² / (n − 1)] / [Σₜ₌₁ⁿ (Xₜ − X̄)² / n]

Interpretation:

  • Small Q indicates positive correlation (consecutive observations tend to be similar)

  • Large Q indicates negative correlation (consecutive observations tend to alternate)

Critical values:

  • For n ≤ 60, use the von Neumann table

  • For n > 60, use the normal approximation: Q_P,α ≈ 2n/(n−1) − z_α √(2n) and Q_N,α ≈ 2n/(n−1) + z_α √(2n)

Rejection rules:

  • Hₐ: ρ > 0 → Reject if Q < Q_P,α

  • Hₐ: ρ < 0 → Reject if Q > Q_N,α

Consequences of ignoring positive correlation:

When data is positively correlated but treated as independent:

  • Var(X̄) = σ²/n + Δ, where Δ > 0. The actual variance of the mean is larger than the formula σ²/n suggests.

  • Confidence intervals are too narrow, so coverage probability drops below 1 − α.

  • Tests of hypotheses have inflated Type I error rates.


Runs Test for Correlation (Distribution-Free)

When normality cannot be assumed, the runs test provides a nonparametric alternative to the von Neumann test.

Steps:

  • Centre the observations: Yₜ = Xₜ − X̄

  • Count the number of runs (R), where a run is a consecutive sequence of all positive or all negative values

  • Count n₁ (number of positive Yₜ) and n₂ (number of negative Yₜ)

Small samples (n₁ ≤ 20 and n₂ ≤ 20): Use the exact runs test table.

Large samples: Use the normal approximation:

Z = (|R − µ| − 0.5) / σ

where µ = 1 + 2n₁n₂/(n₁ + n₂) and σ² = 2n₁n₂(2n₁n₂ − n₁ − n₂) / [(n₁ + n₂)²(n₁ + n₂ − 1)]

Reject H₀ (data is independent) if Z > z_(α/2).

Autocorrelation function (ACF): The R function acf(y) plots lag-k correlations with 95% confidence bands. Values outside the bands at lags 1, 2, 3, ... indicate significant autocorrelation at those lags.


Tukey HSD for Pairwise Comparisons of Means

When comparing t > 2 population means, the Tukey HSD controls the experimentwise Type I error rate while testing all C(t,2) pairwise differences.

Conditions: Equal sample sizes (r = n₁ = ... = nₜ), equal variances (σ₁ = ... = σₜ), and normal distributions.

Based on the studentized range distribution:

q(t, ν) = (ȳ_max − ȳ_min) / (σ̂_p √(1/r))

HSD threshold:

HSD(t, ν) = q(α₀, t, ν) × σ̂_p × √(1/r)

where ν = t(r − 1), and q(α₀, t, ν) is the upper α₀ quantile of the studentized range distribution.

Decision rule: Declare µᵢ and µⱼ significantly different if |ȳᵢ − ȳⱼ| ≥ HSD(t, ν).

Simultaneous CIs: |ȳᵢ − ȳⱼ| ± HSD(t, ν) for all pairs simultaneously.

Tukey-Kramer modification (unequal sample sizes):

Replace √(1/r) with √(1/2 × (1/nᵢ + 1/nⱼ)), and use ν = N − t where N = Σnᵢ.

With unequal sample sizes, the experimentwise error rate is bounded: α_Exp ≤ α₀ (no longer exact).

R:

model <- aov(y ~ group)
TukeyHSD(model, "group", ordered=FALSE, conf.level=0.95)
plot(TukeyHSD(model, "group"))

The R function qtukey(1 - alpha, t, nu) provides the critical value from the studentized range distribution.

Comparison with Bonferroni: The Tukey HSD and Scheffé's procedure have exact experimentwise error rates. The Bonferroni procedure provides only a bound (α_Exp ≤ α₀). For pairwise comparisons specifically, Tukey HSD is generally more powerful than Bonferroni.


Formulas / Diagrams

Hartley Fmax:

Fmax = s²_max / s²_min, reject if ≥ Fmax,α,t,n−1

BFL test statistic:

L = [Σ nᵢ(z̄ᵢ. − z̄..)² / (t − 1)] / [ΣΣ(zᵢⱼ − z̄ᵢ.)² / (N − t)], where zᵢⱼ = |yᵢⱼ − median(yᵢ)|

von Neumann Q:

Q = [Σ(Xₜ − Xₜ₋₁)²/(n−1)] / [Σ(Xₜ − X̄)²/n]

Runs test (large sample):

Z = (|R − µ| − 0.5) / σ, where µ = 1 + 2n₁n₂/(n₁+n₂)

Tukey HSD:

HSD = q(α₀, t, ν) × σ̂_p × √(1/r), ν = t(r−1)

Tukey-Kramer (unequal n):

HSD_ij = q(α₀, t, ν) × σ̂_p × √(1/2 × (1/nᵢ + 1/nⱼ)), ν = N − t


Why It Matters / Exam Flags

⚠️ Hartley's Fmax is extremely sensitive to nonnormality. With a Gamma(shape=0.1) distribution, the actual Type I error rate was .67 to .69 instead of .05. Always check normality before using Fmax.

⚠️ The BFL test is the recommended default for testing equal variances. It is robust to nonnormality and does not require equal sample sizes.

⚠️ In the BFL test, use absolute deviations from the group median, not the mean. The median-based version is more robust to outliers.

⚠️ Positive autocorrelation causes standard CIs to be too narrow and standard tests to reject too often. Always check for correlation in time-ordered data before applying standard methods.

⚠️ The Tukey HSD requires equal sample sizes for the experimentwise error rate to be exact. With unequal sizes, use the Tukey-Kramer modification, which provides a bound α_Exp ≤ α₀.

⚠️ For Tukey HSD: the degrees of freedom ν = t(r − 1), not n − 1 or n + m − 2. This is the pooled df across all t groups.

⚠️ If a CI from Tukey HSD contains zero, there is not significant evidence of a difference for that pair. These two statements (HSD comparison and CI) always agree.


Practice Q&A

Q: Three samples of size n = 9 from normal populations yield s₁² = 8.69, s₂² = 6.89, s₃² = 80.22. Using Hartley's Fmax test at α = .05, do you reject H₀: σ₁² = σ₂² = σ₃²?

A: Fmax = 80.22/6.89 = 11.64. The critical value Fmax,.05,3,8 = 6.00. Since 11.64 > 6.00, reject H₀. The variances are significantly different.

Q: The same data in the previous question produced non-normal Shapiro-Wilk results for two of the three samples. Is the Hartley test still valid?

A: No. Hartley's Fmax is highly sensitive to nonnormality and would likely be detecting the nonnormality rather than true variance differences. Use the BFL test instead.

Q: In a BFL test with t = 3 groups and N = 30 total observations, you compute L = 1.827. The critical value F(.05, 2, 27) = 3.35. What is your conclusion?

A: Since 1.827 < 3.35, fail to reject H₀. There is insufficient evidence of a difference in population variances.

Q: A time series of 150 observations yields Q = 0.441 from the von Neumann test. The estimated first-order autocorrelation is ρ̂ = 0.775. What does this indicate?

A: The small value of Q and large positive ρ̂ indicate strong positive serial correlation. Consecutive observations tend to be similar. Standard confidence intervals and tests assuming independence would be unreliable for this data.

Q: In a runs test, 150 observations produce R = 30 runs, n₁ = 70, n₂ = 80. What are µ, σ, and the Z-statistic?

A: µ = 1 + 2(70)(80)/150 = 75.67. σ² = 2(70)(80)(2(70)(80) − 70 − 80) / (150²)(149) = 36.92. Z = (|30 − 75.67| − 0.5) / √36.92 = 7.43. p-value ≈ 1.05 × 10⁻¹³. Overwhelmingly significant evidence of correlation.

Q: Using Tukey-Kramer with t = 4 groups, ν = 58, and σ̂_p = 3.247, what is HSD for comparing groups with n₁ = 18 and n₄ = 14?

A: qtukey(.95, 4, 58) = 3.741. HSD = 3.741 × 3.247 × √(1/2 × (1/18 + 1/14)) = 3.741 × 3.247 × √(.0635) = 3.741 × 3.247 × 0.252 ≈ 3.06.

Q: What is the key advantage of Tukey HSD over Bonferroni for pairwise comparisons?

A: Tukey HSD achieves the exact experimentwise error rate α_Exp = α₀ (with equal sample sizes), whereas Bonferroni only ensures α_Exp ≤ α₀. Because the Bonferroni bound is conservative, Tukey HSD typically produces narrower confidence intervals and more powerful tests.


Related Terms / Search Tags

Hartley Fmax test, Brown-Forsythe-Levene test, BFL test, Levene test, homogeneity of variance, equal variance assumption, variance ratio test, F-test for variances, von Neumann test, autocorrelation, first-order autocorrelation, serial correlation, AR(1), lag plot, time series, runs test, distribution-free test, Tukey HSD, Tukey-Kramer, honest significant difference, studentized range, pairwise comparisons, multiple comparisons, experimentwise error rate, family-wise error rate, Bonferroni correction, Scheffé procedure, simultaneous confidence intervals, ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, pooled variance, ACF, autocorrelation function