IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Robust descriptive discriminant analysis for repeated measures data


  • Sajobi, Tolulope T.
  • Lix, Lisa M.
  • Dansu, Bolanle M.
  • Laverty, William
  • Li, Longhai


Discriminant analysis (DA) procedures based on parsimonious mean and/or covariance structures have recently been proposed for repeated measures data. However, these procedures rest on the assumption of a multivariate normal distribution. This study examines repeated measures DA (RMDA) procedures based on maximum likelihood (ML) and coordinatewise trimming (CT) estimation methods and investigates bias and root mean square error (RMSE) in discriminant function coefficients (DFCs) using Monte Carlo techniques. Study parameters include population distribution, covariance structure, sample size, mean configuration, and number of repeated measurements. The results show that for ML estimation, bias in DFC estimates was usually largest when the data were normally distributed, but there was no consistent trend in RMSE. For non-normal distributions, the average bias of CT estimates for procedures that assume unstructured group means and structured covariances was at least 40% smaller than the values for corresponding procedures based on ML estimators. The average RMSE for the former procedures was at least 10% smaller than the average RMSE for the latter procedures, but only when the data were sampled from extremely skewed or heavy-tailed distributions. This finding was observed even when the covariance and mean structures of the RMDA procedure were mis-specified. The proposed robust procedures can be used to identify measurement occasions that make the largest contribution to group separation when the data are sampled from multivariate skewed or heavy-tailed distributions.

Suggested Citation

  • Sajobi, Tolulope T. & Lix, Lisa M. & Dansu, Bolanle M. & Laverty, William & Li, Longhai, 2012. "Robust descriptive discriminant analysis for repeated measures data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(9), pages 2782-2794.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:56:y:2012:i:9:p:2782-2794 DOI: 10.1016/j.csda.2012.02.029

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. He, Xuming & Fung, Wing K., 2000. "High Breakdown Estimation for Multiple Populations with Applications to Discriminant Analysis," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 151-162, February.
    2. Hadi, Ali S. & Luceno, Alberto, 1997. "Maximum trimmed likelihood estimators: a unified approach, examples, and algorithms," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 251-272, August.
    3. Stefan Van Aelst & Gert Willems, 2010. "Inference for robust canonical variate analysis," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 4(2), pages 181-197, September.
    4. Hubert, Mia & Van Driessen, Katrien, 2004. "Fast and robust discriminant analysis," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 301-320, March.
    5. Todorov, Valentin & Neykov, Neyko & Neytchev, Plamen, 1994. "Robust two-group discrimination by bounded influence regression. A Monte Carlo simulation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 289-302, March.
    6. Neykov, N. & Filzmoser, P. & Dimova, R. & Neytchev, P., 2007. "Robust fitting of mixtures using the trimmed likelihood estimator," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 299-308, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:56:y:2012:i:9:p:2782-2794. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.