REPEATED-MEASURES ANOVA

Old and New

One-Way ANOVA looks at differences between different samples exposed to different

manipulations (or different samples that may come from different groups) within a single factor.
That is, 1 factor, k levels k separate groups are

compared.

NEW: Often, we can answer the same research questions looking at just 1 sample that is exposed to different manipulations within a factor.
That is, 1 factor, k levels 1 sample is compared

across k conditions.

Multiple measurements for each sample.

That is, a single sample is measured on the same dependent variable once for each condition

(level) within a factor.

Investigate development over time (Quazi-Independent: time 1, time 2, time 3) Chart learning (manipulate different levels of practice) (Independent: 1 hour, 4 hours, 7 hours) Compare different priming effects in a LDT (Independent: Forward, backward, no-prime, non-word) Simply examine performance under different

conditions with the same individuals.

(Independent: suspect, equal, detective, audio format)

Extending t-tests
T-test
Comparing two

ANOVA cousin
Comparing more than two

independent samples?
Independent-samples t-test!

independent samples within a single factor?

One-way ANOVA!

Comparing the dependent

Comparing the dependent

measures of a single sample under two different conditions?

Related- (or dependent- or

measures of a single sample under more than two different conditions?

Repeated-Measures

paired-) sample t-test!

ANOVA!

R-M ANOVA
Like the Related-samples t, repeated measures ANOVA is more powerful because we eliminate

individual differences from the equation.

In a One-way ANOVA, the F-ratio is calculated using the variance from three sources:
F = Treatment(group) Effect + Individual differences + Experimenter error/Individual differences + Experimenter error.
The denominator represents random error and we

do not know how much was from ID and EE. This is error we expect from chance.

Why R-M ANOVA is COOL

With a Repeated-Measure ANOVA, we can measure and eliminate the variability due to

individual differences!!!! So, the F ratio is conceptually calculated using the variance from two sources:
F = Treatment(group) Effect + Experimenter error/

Experimenter error. The denominator represents truly random error that we cannot directly measurethe leftovers. This is error we expect just from chance. What does this mean for our F-value?

R-M vs. One-Way: Power

All else being equal, Repeated-Measures

ANOVAs will be more powerful because they have a smaller error term bigger Fs. Let me demonstrate, if you will.
Assume treatment variance = 10, experimental-

error variance = 1, and individual difference variance = 1000.

In a One-Way ANOVA, F conceptually = (10 + 1 + 1000)/(1 + 1000) = 1.01 In a Repeated-Measures ANOVA, F conceptually = (10 + 1)/(1) = 11

What is a R-M ANOVA doing?

Again, SStotal = SSbetween + Sswithin Difference: We break the SSwithin into two parts:
SSwithin/error = SSsubjects/individual differences + SSerror To get SSerror we subtract SSsubjects from SSwithin/error. This time, we truly have SSerror , or random variability.

Other than breaking the SSwithin into two components and subtracting out SSsubjects, repeated measures ANOVA is similar to OneWay ANOVA.

Lets learn through example.

A Priming Experiment! 10 participants engage in an LDT, within

which they are exposed to 4 different types of word pairs. RT to click Word or Non-Word recorded and averaged for each pair type.
Forward-Prime pairs (e.g., baby-stork)
Backward-Prime pairs (e.g., stork-baby) Unrelated Pairs (e.g., glass-apple)

Non-Word Pairs (e.g., door-blug)

Hypotheses
For the overall RM ANOVA:
Ho: f = b = u= n Ha: At least one treatment mean is different from

another.

Specifically:
Ho: f < b
Ho: f and b < u and n Ho: u < n

The Data
Part 1 2 3 4 Forward .2 .5 .4 .4 Backward .1 .3 .3 .2 Unrelated .4 .8 .6 .8 Nonword .7 .9 .8 .9 Sum Part. 1.4 2.5 2.1 2.3 F2= 1.36 B2= .58

5 6
7 8 9 10

.6 .3
.1 .2 .3 .4 3.4

.4 .3
.1 .1 .2 .2 2.2

.8 .5
.5 .6 .4 .6 6

.8 .8
.7 .9 .7 .9 8.1

2.6 1.9
1.4 1.8 1.6 2.1 19.7

U2= 3.82 N2= 6.63

P2= 385 Xt2= 12.39

All = 19.7

Formula for SStotal

Ians SSt =
2 ( X TOT ) X 2TOT N TOT

Remember, this is the sum of the squared deviations from the grand mean.

So, SStotal = 12.39 (19.72/40) = 12.39 9.70225 = 2.68775 Importantly, SStotal = SSwithin/error + SSbetween

The Data
Part 1 2 3 4 Forward .2 .5 .4 .4 Backward .1 .3 .3 .2 Unrelated .4 .8 .6 .8 Nonword .7 .9 .8 .9 Sum Part. 1.4 2.5 2.1 2.3 F2= 1.36 B2= .58

5 6
7 8 9 10

.6 .3
.1 .2 .3 .4 3.4

.4 .3
.1 .1 .2 .2 2.2

.8 .5
.5 .6 .4 .6 6

.8 .8
.7 .9 .7 .9 8.1

2.6 1.9
1.4 1.8 1.6 2.1 19.7

U2= 3.82 N2= 6.63

P2= 385 Xt2= 12.39

All = 19.7

Within-Groups Sum of Squares: SSwithin/error

SSwithin/error = the sum of each SS with each

group/condition. Measures variability within each condition, then adds them together. ( X 1 ) 2 ( X 2 ) 2 ( X k ) 2 2 2 2 ( X 1 ) ( X 2 ) ... ( X k ) n n n
1 2 k

So, SSwithin/error = (1.36 ([3.4]2/10)) + (.58 ([2.2]2/10)) + (3.82 ([6]2/10)

+ (6.63 ([8.1]2/10)
= (1.36 1.156) + (.58 .484) + (3.82 3.6) + (6.63 6.561) = .204+ .096+ .22+ .069= .589

The Data
Part 1 2 3 4 Forward .2 .5 .4 .4 Backward .1 .3 .3 .2 Unrelated .4 .8 .6 .8 Nonword .7 .9 .8 .9 Sum Part. 1.4 2.5 2.1 2.3 F2= 1.36 B2= .58

5 6
7 8 9 10

.6 .3
.1 .2 .3 .4 3.4

.4 .3
.1 .1 .2 .2 2.2

.8 .5
.5 .6 .4 .6 6

.8 .8
.7 .9 .7 .9 8.1

2.6 1.9
1.4 1.8 1.6 2.1 19.7

U2= 3.82 N2= 6.63

P2= 385 Xt2= 12.39

All = 19.7

Breaking up SSwithin/error
We must find SSSUBJECTS and subtract that

from total within variance to get SSERROR SSSUBJECTS =

K is generic for the number of conditions, as usual. SSSUBJECTS = (1.42/4 +2.52/4 +2.12/4 +2.32/4 +2.62/4

+1.92/4 +1.42/4 +1.82/4 +1.62/4 +2.12/4 +) 19.72/40 = .49+1.5625+1.1025+1.3225+1.69+.9025+.49+.81+.6 4+1.1025) -9.70225 = 10.1125-9.70225 =.41025

Now for SSerror

SSerror = SSwithin/error SSsubjects SSerror = .589 - .41025 = .17875 or .179 Weeeeeeeeee! We have pure randomness!

The Data
Part 1 2 3 4 Forward .2 .5 .4 .4 Backward .1 .3 .3 .2 Unrelated .4 .8 .6 .8 Nonword .7 .9 .8 .9 Sum Part. 1.4 2.5 2.1 2.3 F2= 1.36 B2= .58

5 6
7 8 9 10

.6 .3
.1 .2 .3 .4 3.4

.4 .3
.1 .1 .2 .2 2.2

.8 .5
.5 .6 .4 .6 6

.8 .8
.7 .9 .7 .9 8.1

2.6 1.9
1.4 1.8 1.6 2.1 19.7

U2= 3.82 N2= 6.63

P2= 385 Xt2= 12.39

All = 19.7

SSbetween-group:
The (same) Formula:
( X 1 ) 2 ( X 2 ) 2 ( X k ) 2 ( X TOT )2 ... n1 n2 nk NTOT

So = SSbetween = [((3.4)2/10) + ((2.2)2/10) + ((6)2/10) + ((8.1)2/10)]

19.72/40 = (1.156+ .484+ 3.6+ 6.561) 9.70225 = 11.801 9.70225 = 2.09875 or 2.099

Getting Variance from SS

Need? DEGREES OF FREEDOM! K=4 Ntotal = total number of scores = 40 (4x10)
DfTOTAL = Ntotal 1 = 39 DfBETWEEN/GROUP = k 1 = 3 Dfwithin/error= N K = 40 4 = 36 Dfsubjects = s-1 = 10-1 (where s is the # of subjects) = 9 Dferror = (k-1)(s-1) = (3)(9) = 27 OR Dfwithin/error - Dfsubjects = 36 9 = 27

Mean Squared
mean)

(deviations from the

We want to find the average squared deviations from the mean for each type of variability. To get an average, you divide by n in some form (or k which is n of groups) and do a little correction with -1.
That is, you use df.

MSbetween/group = MSwithin/error =

SS between df between

= 2.099/3 = .7 = .179/27 = .007

SS ERROR df ERROR

How do we interpret these MS

MS error is an estimate of population

variance.
Or, variability due to ___________?

F?
MS F = MS
BET

= .7/.007 = 105.671

ERROR

(looks like it should be 100, but there were

rounding issues due to very small numbers.

OK, what is Fcrit? Do we reject the Null??

Pros and Cons

Advantages
Each participant serves as own control. Do not need as many participants as one-way. Why? More power,

smaller error term. Great for investigating trends and changes.

Disadvantages
Practice effects (learning) Carry-over effects (bias) Demand characteristics (more exposure, more time to think

about meaning of the experiment).

Control
Counterbalancing Time (greater spacingbut still have implicit memory). Cover Stories

Sphericity
Levels of our IV are not independent
same participants are in each level (condition).

Our conditions are dependent, or related.

We want to make sure all conditions are equally

related to one another, or equally dependent.

We look at the variance of the differences between every pair of conditions, and assume these variances are the same.
If these variances are equal, we have Sphericity

More Sphericity
Testing for Sphericity
Mauchlys test Significant, no sphericity, NS Sphericity! If no sphericity, we must engage in a correction of the F-ratio. Actually, we alter the degrees of freedom associated with the F-ratio.

Four types of correction (see book)

Estimate sphericity from 0 (no sphericity) to 1 (sphericity) Greenhouse-Geiser (1/k-1) Huynh-Feldt MANOVA (assumes measures are independent) non-parametric, rank-based Friedman test (one-factor only)

Symmetry

Effect Sizes
The issue is not entirely settled. Still some

debate and uncertainty on how to best measure effect sizes given the different possible error terms. 2 = See book for equation.

Specific tests
Can use Tukey post-hoc for exploration Can use planned comparisons if you have a

priori predictions.
Sphericity not an issue

Contrast Formula

Same as one way, except error term is different

Contrasts
Some in SPSS:
Difference: Each level of a factor is compared to the mean

of the previous level Helmert: Each level of a factor is compared to the mean of the next level Polynomial: orthogonal polynomial contrasts Simple: Each level of a factor is compared to the last level

Specific:

GLM forward backward unrelate nonword /WSFACTOR = prime 4 special (1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 0 0 0 0 -1 1)

2+ Within Factors
Set up. Have participants run on tread mill for 30min. Within-subject factors:
Factor A Measure Fatigue every 10min, 3 time points. Factor B Do this once after drinking water, and again (different day) after drinking new sports drink.

3 (time) x 2 (drink) within-subject design.

Much is the same, much different

We have 2 factors (A and B) and an interaction between A and B. These are within-subjects factors
All participants go through all the levels of each factor.

Again, we will want to find SS for the factors and interaction, and eventually the respective MS as

well. Again, this will be very similar to a one-way ANOVA. Like a 1-factor RM ANOVA, we will also compute SSsubject so we can find SSerror.

What is very different?

Again, we can parse up SS w/e into SSsubject and

SSerror. NEW: We will do this for each F we calculate. For each F, we will calculate:
SS Effect ; SS Subject (within that effect) ; and SS Error

What IS SSError for each effect?

(We will follow the logic of factorial ANOVAS)

What are the SSErrors now?

Lets start with main effects. Looking at Factor A, we have
Variability due to Factor A: SSFactor A Variability due to individual differences. How do we measure that? By looking at the variability due to a main effect of Participant (i.e., Subject): SSSubject (within Factor A) Variability just due to error. How do we calculate that!?!?!? Think about the idea that we actually have 2 factors here, Factor A and Subject.

The Error is in the INTERACTIONS with Subject.

For FFactor A (Time)
SSAS is the overall variability looking at Factor A

and Subjects in Factor A (collapsing across Drink).

To find SSerror for the FFactor A (Time) Calculate: SSAS; SSFactor A ; SSSubject (within Factor A) SSerror is: SSAS - (SSFactor A + SSSubject (within Factor A))
That is, SSerror for FFactor A (Time)is SS A*subj !!!!!! Which measures variability within factor A due to the different participants (i.e., error)

The Same for Factor B.

For FFactor B (Drink)
SSAS is the overall variability looking at Factor B

and Subjects in Factor B (collapsing across Time).

To find SSerror for the FFactor B (Drink) Calculate: SSBS; SSFactor B ; SSSubject (within Factor B) SSerror is: SSBS - (SSFactor B + SSSubject (within Factor B))
That is, SSerror for FFactor B (Drink)is SS B*subj !!!!!! SS B*subj: Which measures variability within factor

B due to the different participants (i.e., error)

Similar for AxB Interaction

For FAxB
SSBetween groups is the overall variability due to

Factor A, Factor B, and Subjects.

To find SSerror for the FAxB Calculate: SSBetween; SSFactor A ; SSFactor B ; SSSubject SSerror is: SSBetween - (SSFactor A + SSFactor B + SSSubject)
That is, SSerror for FAxB is SS A*B*subj !!!!!!
SS A*B*subj: measures variability within the AxB interaction

due to the different participants (i.e., error)

We are finely chopping SSW/E

SSSub (A)

SSSub (B)

SSSub (AxB)

Getting to F
Factor A (Time)
SSA = 91.2; dfA = (kA 1) = 3 1 = 2 SSError(A*S) = 16.467; dfError(A*S) = (kA 1)(s 1) = (3-

1)(10-1) = 18 So, MSA = 91.2/ 2 = 45.6 So, MSError(A*S) = 16.467/ 18 = .915 FA = 45.6/.915 = 49.846

Snapshot of other Fs
Factor B (Drink)
dfB = (kB 1) = 2 1 = 1 dfError(B*S) = (kB 1)(s 1) = (2-1)(10-1) = 9

AxB (Time x Drink)

dfAxB = (kA 1)(kB 1) = 2 x 1= 2 dfError(A*B*S) = (kA 1)(kB 1)(s 1) = 2 x 1 x 9 = 18

Use SSs to calculate the respective MSeffect

and MSerror for the other main effect and the Interaction F-values.