2005
DOI: 10.1002/sim.2324
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Confidence intervals for an effect size measure based on the Mann–Whitney statistic. Part 2: asymptotic methods and evaluation

Abstract: Several asymptotic confidence interval methods for U/mn, the Mann-Whitney U statistic divided by the product of the two sample sizes, are developed and evaluated alongside published methods. Novel methods derived from Gaussian and beta models perform well, though overall a modification of the Hanley-McNeil approach (method 5 in this evaluation) performed better and is recommended for calculating confidence intervals for U/mn for continuously distributed data.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
137
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 143 publications
(141 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
137
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the comparison of abundance of specimens recorded in treated and control areas, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied (Newcombe, 2006). The software SPSS 20 and Shannon's diversity index were used (Kautz et al, 2006).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the comparison of abundance of specimens recorded in treated and control areas, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied (Newcombe, 2006). The software SPSS 20 and Shannon's diversity index were used (Kautz et al, 2006).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This relative effect size statistic, q, can be regarded as expressing the degree of separation between two frequency distributions. The statistic q is analogous to the standardised difference obtained for normally distributed data by dividing the difference of the means by the pooled standard deviation (37,38).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, all the models considered can be described using the parameter p 1 = FdG = p • 1 (F, G) which is particularly meaningful in the context of the WRS test. In more detail, in Lehmann (1998) (p. 70) and Newcombe (2006) it is argued that p 1 can be viewed as the effect size in the context of the WRS test. It should also be noted that W XY is, in practice, the natural estimator of p 1 :p 1 = W XY /mn.…”
Section: Proposition 1 Under the Location Shift Model The Power Funmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to obtain the lower bounds for p 1 , we adopt method 5 in Newcombe (2006), since it provides good coverage accuracies. In detail, the conservative estimatorp γ 1 is derived inverting the asymptotic distribution ofp 1 (stemming from (5) As regard the RP estimators, the following alternatives can be considered:…”
Section: Example Of Applicationmentioning
confidence: 99%