2013NDSU Repository (North Dakota State University)Open access

Comparing Dunnett's Test with the False Discovery Rate Method: A Simulation Study

Jamie Marie Kubat

Open full text 1 citations

Abstract

Recently, the idea of multiple comparisons has been criticized because of its lack of power in datasets with a large number of treatments. Many family-wise error corrections are far too restrictive when large quantities of comparisons are being made. At the other extreme, a test like the least significant difference does not control the family-wise error rate, and therefore is not restrictive enough to identify true differences. A solution lies in multiple testing. The false discovery rate (FDR) uses a simple algorithm and can be applied to datasets with many treatments. The current research compares the FDR method to Dunnett's test using agronomic data from a study with 196 varieties of dry beans. Simulated data is used to assess type I error and power of the tests. In general, the FDR method provides a higher power than Dunnett's test while maintaining control of the type I error rate.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Recently, the idea of multiple comparisons has been criticized because of its lack of power in datasets with a large number of treatments. Many family-wise error corrections are far too restrictive when large quantities of comparisons are being made. At the other extreme, a test like the least significant difference does not control the family-wise error rate, and therefore is not restrictive enough to identify true differences. A solution lies in multiple testing. The false discovery rate (FDR) uses a simple algorithm and can be applied to datasets with many treatments. The current research compares the FDR method to Dunnett's test using agronomic data from a study with 196 varieties of dry beans. Simulated data is used to assess type I error and power of the tests. In general, the FDR method provides a higher power than Dunnett's test while maintaining control of the type I error rate.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Recently, the idea of multiple comparisons has been criticized because of its lack of power in datasets with a large number of treatments. Many family-wise error corrections are far too restrictive when large quantities of comparisons are being made. At the other extreme, a test like the least significant difference does not control the family-wise error rate, and therefore is not restrictive enough to identify true differences. A solution lies in multiple testing. The false discovery rate (FDR) uses a simple algorithm and can be applied to datasets with many treatments. The current research compares the FDR method to Dunnett's test using agronomic data from a study with 196 varieties of dry beans. Simulated data is used to assess type I error and power of the tests. In general, the FDR method provides a higher power than Dunnett's test while maintaining control of the type I error rate.

Key concepts: False discovery rate, Type I and type II errors, Multiple comparisons problem, Statistics, Word error rate, Mathematics, Statistical power, Statistical hypothesis testing

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparing Dunnett's Test with the False Discovery Rate Method: A Simulation Study — Research Paper | ScholarLens