Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T22:22:21.874Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of two treatments when there may be an initial effect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Elizabeth L. Scott*
Affiliation:
Statistical Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.

Abstract

Consider situations where the treatment may cause an initial effect and may also cause a long-range effect. We want to evaluate the treatment, or to compare two treatments, when the effect of treatment may result from the two distinct mechanisms, M1 and M2. We may wish to evaluate M1 and M2 separately, but we may also want to evaluate their combined effect M3. Examples are given and the general results are applied to the special case arising in weather modification studies and elsewhere: the possible effects are multiplicative and the distribution of non-zero variables is gamma with at most the scale parameter affected by treatment. An example demonstrates that the two components may be too weak to be judged significant while their sum is large and significant. The locally optimum C(α) test is used.

There is a brief discussion of the power function of the tests. The asymptotic power agrees well, in general, by the results of the Monte Carlo simulation for the test Z3 of the combined effect. If the zero values are discarded and then Z2 employed, there is large bias in the power. The bias is more pronounced if the Wilcoxon, Mann–Whitney test is employed. Notice that the two effects under study may be acting in the same direction or they may be in opposition.

Type
Part 5 — Statistical Theory
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 Applied Probability Trust 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dawkins, S. M., Neyman, J., Scott, E. L. and Wells, M. A. (1977) Preliminary statistical analysis of precipitation amounts. Chapter 13: Data base and methodology of analysis. In The Final Report on the Pyramid Lake Pilot Project 1970 to 1975 , ed. Squires, P., Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada, 13.113.44.Google Scholar
Moran, P. A. P. (1955) The statistical design of an experiment to test the stimulation of rain. Austral. J. Phys. 8, 440448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, P. A. P. (1973) Asymptotic properties of homogeneity tests. Biometrika 60, 7985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mosteller, F. (1977) Experimentation and innovations. Bull. Internat. Statist. Inst. 47 (1), 559572.Google Scholar
Neyman, J. and Scott, E. L. (1965) Asymptotically optimal tests of composite hypotheses for randomized experiments with noncontrolled predictor variables. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 60, 699721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neyman, J. and Scott, E. L. (1967a) Note on techniques of evaluation of single rain stimulation experiments. Proc. 5th Berkeley Symp. Math. Statist. Prob. 5, 371384.Google Scholar
Neyman, J. and Scott, E. L. (1967b) On the use of C (a) tests of composite hypotheses. Bull. Internat. Statist. Inst. 41 (1), 477496.Google Scholar
Neyman, J. and Scott, E. L. (1967C) Some outstanding problems relating to rain modification. Proc. 5th Berkeley Symp. Math. Statist. Prob. 5, 293326.Google Scholar
Neyman, J., Scott, E. L. and Vasilevskis, M. (1960) Statistical evaluation of the Santa Barbara randomized cloud seeding experiment. Bull. Amer. Meteorol. Soc. 41, 531547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neyman, J., Scott, E. L. and Wells, M. A. (1968) Influence of atmospheric stability layers on the effect of ground-based cloud seeding, I. Empirical results. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 60, 416423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sänger, R. et al. (1958–1964) Grossversuch III zum Bekämpfung des Hagels im Tessin. Annual Reports, 1957–1963. Abteilung fur Landwirtschaft des Eidg. Volkswirtschaftsdepartmentes, Bern, Switzerland.Google Scholar