Some tests for detecting trends based on the modified Baumgartner–Weiß–Schindler statistics
We propose a modified nonparametric Baumgartner–Weiß–Schindler test and investigate its use in testing for trends among K binomial populations. Exact conditional and unconditional approaches to p-value calculation are explored in conjunction with the statistic in addition to a similar test statistic proposed by Neuhäuser (2006), the unconditional approaches considered including the maximization approach (Basu, 1977), the confidence interval approach (Berger and Boos, 1994), and the E+M approach (Lloyd, 2008). The procedures are compared with regard to actual Type I error and power and examples are provided. The conditional approach and the E+M approach performed well, with the E+M approach having an actual level much closer to the nominal level. The E+M approach and the conditional approach are generally more powerful than the other p-value calculation approaches in the scenarios considered. The power difference between the conditional approach and the E+M approach is often small in the balance case. However, in the unbalanced case, the power comparison between those two approaches based on our proposed test statistic show that the E+M approach has higher power than the conditional approach.
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.
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.
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.:
- Markus Neuhäuser, 2005. "Exact tests based on the Baumgartner-Weiß-Schindler statistic—A survey," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 1-29, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:57:y:2013:i:1:p:246-261. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
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.