Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Nonparametric Tests of Differences in Medians: Comparison of the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney and Robust Rank-Order Tests


Author Info

  • Nick Feltovich



The nonparametric Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test is commonly used by experimental economists for detecting differences in central tendency between two samples. This test is only theoretically appropriate under certain assumptions concerning the population distributions from which the samples are drawn, and is often used in cases where it is unclear whether these assumptions hold, and even when they clearly do not hold. Fligner and Pollicello's (1981, Journal of the American Statistical Association. 76, 162–168) robust rank-order test is a modification of the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test, designed to be appropriate in more situations than Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney. This paper uses simulations to compare the performance of the two tests under a variety of distributional assumptions. The results are mixed. The robust rank-order test tends to yield too many false positive results for medium-sized samples, but this liberalness is relatively invariant across distributional assumptions, and seems to be due to a deficiency of the normal approximation to its test statistic's distribution, rather than the test itself. The performance of the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test varies hugely, depending on the distributional assumptions; in some cases, it is conservative, in others, extremely liberal. The tests have roughly similar power. Overall, the robust rank-order test performs better than Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney, though when critical values for the robust rank-order test are not available, so that the normal approximation must be used, their relative performance depends on the underlying distributions, the sample sizes, and the level of significance used. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal Experimental Economics.

Volume (Year): 6 (2003)
Issue (Month): 3 (November)
Pages: 273-297

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:6:y:2003:i:3:p:273-297

Contact details of provider:
Web page:

Related research

Keywords: robust rank-order; Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney; hypothesis testing; power; critical values;


References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Nick Feltovich & John Duffy, 1999. "Does observation of others affect learning in strategic environments? An experimental study," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 131-152.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.


This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


Access and download statistics


When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:6:y:2003:i:3:p:273-297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.