Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 11, 2026

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Controlling the Type I error rate by using the nonparametric bootstrap when comparing means
1Department of Quantitative Methods for Economy and Business, University of Murcia, Spain.
Abstract:
Of the several tests for comparing population means, the best known are the ANOVA, Welch, Brown-Forsythe, and James tests. Each performs appropriately only in certain conditions, and none performs well in every setting. Researchers, therefore, have to select the appropriate procedure and run the risk of making a bad selection and, consequently, of erroneous conclusions. It would be desirable to have a test that performs well in any situation and so obviate preliminary analysis of data. We assess and compare several tests for equality of means in a simulation study, including non-parametric bootstrap techniques, finding that the bootstrap ANOVA and bootstrap Brown-Forsythe tests exhibit a similar and exceptionally good behaviour.
Related Concept Videos
Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance, comparing...
Introduction to Nonparametric Statistics
One of...
Bootstrapping
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Bonferroni Test
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
Errors In Hypothesis Tests

