Abstract
A factor is an independent variable. A factorial design completely crosses two or more factors. It is an efficient design that simultaneously studies main effects of factors and their interactions. A distinction is made between factors that can be manipulated by researchers and factors that cannot be manipulated. Usually, the effects of manipulable factors are causally interpreted. Nonmanipulable factors are included for two different reasons, but they should not be dichotomized. First, to increase the precision of parameter estimates and the power of statistical tests. The nonmanipulable factor is included as a blocking variable in a randomized block design (if its values are known before participants are assigned to conditions) or as a covariate in the analysis of the data. Second, to study their relations with manipulable factors, but these relations should not be causally interpreted. The statistical analysis of factorial design data has to be tuned to the type of dependent variable (DV). Usually, ANOVA or ANCOVA are applied to (approximately) continuous DVs, but these methods make strong assumptions. Akritas et al.’s (J Am Stat Assoc 92:3375–3384, 1997) nonparametric method is more appropriate to analyze (approximately) continuous and ranked DVs. The preferred methods for dichotomous, nominal-categorical, and ordinal-categorical DVs are the logit, baseline-category, and cumulative logit models, respectively. Often, researchers apply omnibus statistical tests to factorial design data. These tests mainly fit into exploratory research. Confirmatory studies prespecify specific hypotheses. The proper methods to test these hypotheses are planned comparisons of conditions.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Akritas, M. G., Arnold, S. F., & Brunner, E. (1997). Nonparametric hypotheses and rank statistics for unbalanced factorial designs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 92, 3375–3384.
Allison, D. B., Gorman, B. S., & Primavera, L. H. (1993). Some of the most common questions asked of statistical consultants: Our favorite responses and recommended readings. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 119, 153–185.
Bracht, G. H., & Glass, G. V. (1968). The external validity of experiments. American Educational Research Journal, 5, 437–474.
Clinch, J. J., & Keselman, H. J. (1982). Parametric alternatives to the analysis of variance. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7, 207–214.
Cohen, J. (1983). The cost of dichotomization. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 249–253.
DeCoster, J., Iselin, A. M. R., & Gallucci, M. (2009). A conceptual and empirical examination of justifications for dichotomization. Psychological Methods, 14, 349–366.
Glass, G. V., Peckham, P. D., & Sanders, J. R. (1972). Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the analysis of variance and analysis of covariance. Review of Educational Research, 42, 237–288.
Hochberg, Y. (1988). A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika, 75, 800–802.
Humphreys, L. G., & Fleishman, A. (1974). A pseudo-orthogonal and other analysis of variance designs involving individual difference variables. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 464–472.
Jaccard, J., Becker, M. A., & Wood, G. (1984). Pairwise multiple comparison procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 589–596.
Keppel, G., & Wickens, T. D. (2004). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19–40.
Ramsey, P. H. (2002). Comparison of closed testing procedures for pairwise testing of means. Psychological Methods, 7, 504–523.
Toothaker, L. E., & Newman, D. (1994). Nonparametric competitors to the two-way ANOVA. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 19, 237–273.
Wilcox, R. R. (2012). Introduction to robust estimation and testing (3rd ed.). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mellenbergh, G.J. (2019). Interactions and Specific Hypotheses. In: Counteracting Methodological Errors in Behavioral Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12272-0_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12272-0_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74352-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12272-0
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)