Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Jan;54(1):86-92.

Should we always choose a nonparametric test when comparing two apparently nonnormal distributions?

Author information

  • 1Norwegian Cancer Society and Section of Medical Statistics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. eva.skovlund@basalmed.uio.no

Abstract

When clinical data are subjected to statistical analysis, a common question is how to choose an appropriate significance test. Comparing two independent groups with observations measured on a continuous scale, the question is typically whether to choose the two-sample-t test or the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test (WMW test). Similar results are often obtained, but which conclusion can be drawn if significance tests give highly different P-values? The t test is optimal for normally distributed observations with common variance and robust to deviations from normality if sample sizes are not very small. The WMW test makes no distributional assumptions, but depends heavily on equal shape and variance of the two distributions (homoscedasticity). We have compared the properties of the traditional two-sample t test, a modified t test allowing unequal variance, and the WMW test by stochastic simulation. All show acceptable behaviour when the two distributions have similar variance. When variances differ, the modified t test is superior to the other two.

PMID:
11165471
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk