What will happen if I use a nonparametric test with normally distributed data?



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;







up vote
7
down vote

favorite
2












I was asked if a type I error in the Shapiro-Wilk test would impact the main analysis and if the wrong test was used if it would matter or not if my data was normally distributed...










share|cite|improve this question





















  • That makes sense thank you!
    – DaisyRiver
    Nov 11 at 2:56










  • @a_statistician - might want to expand that a little and post it as an answer, since it is!
    – jbowman
    Nov 11 at 3:02










  • @jbowman Thank you for your editing.
    – user158565
    Nov 11 at 3:28
















up vote
7
down vote

favorite
2












I was asked if a type I error in the Shapiro-Wilk test would impact the main analysis and if the wrong test was used if it would matter or not if my data was normally distributed...










share|cite|improve this question





















  • That makes sense thank you!
    – DaisyRiver
    Nov 11 at 2:56










  • @a_statistician - might want to expand that a little and post it as an answer, since it is!
    – jbowman
    Nov 11 at 3:02










  • @jbowman Thank you for your editing.
    – user158565
    Nov 11 at 3:28












up vote
7
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
7
down vote

favorite
2






2





I was asked if a type I error in the Shapiro-Wilk test would impact the main analysis and if the wrong test was used if it would matter or not if my data was normally distributed...










share|cite|improve this question













I was asked if a type I error in the Shapiro-Wilk test would impact the main analysis and if the wrong test was used if it would matter or not if my data was normally distributed...







nonparametric






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 11 at 2:26









DaisyRiver

462




462











  • That makes sense thank you!
    – DaisyRiver
    Nov 11 at 2:56










  • @a_statistician - might want to expand that a little and post it as an answer, since it is!
    – jbowman
    Nov 11 at 3:02










  • @jbowman Thank you for your editing.
    – user158565
    Nov 11 at 3:28
















  • That makes sense thank you!
    – DaisyRiver
    Nov 11 at 2:56










  • @a_statistician - might want to expand that a little and post it as an answer, since it is!
    – jbowman
    Nov 11 at 3:02










  • @jbowman Thank you for your editing.
    – user158565
    Nov 11 at 3:28















That makes sense thank you!
– DaisyRiver
Nov 11 at 2:56




That makes sense thank you!
– DaisyRiver
Nov 11 at 2:56












@a_statistician - might want to expand that a little and post it as an answer, since it is!
– jbowman
Nov 11 at 3:02




@a_statistician - might want to expand that a little and post it as an answer, since it is!
– jbowman
Nov 11 at 3:02












@jbowman Thank you for your editing.
– user158565
Nov 11 at 3:28




@jbowman Thank you for your editing.
– user158565
Nov 11 at 3:28










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
12
down vote













In statistical analysis, if your data follow a parametric distribution, you should utilize the benefit of knowing the distribution, and employ the statistical methods based on that distribution.



But sometimes we do not know the distribution of the random variable, so the nonparametric statistical methods were developed to embrace the wide range of the distributions while sacrificing some efficiency.



Given you know the distribution of random variable and use the nonparametric statistical method, instead of parametric statistical methods based on knowing the distribution, it will be inefficient, i.e., the power of test will decrease, standard error will increase, and the confidence intervals will be wider than with the parametric method.






share|cite|improve this answer





























    up vote
    12
    down vote













    If your data happened to be drawn from a normal population (and the other usual assumptions for an ordinary t-test apply), then the test works as it should (it's non-parametric, it's supposed to work). There's no drama on that score.



    If you know enough that you're confident in assuming normality you may want to take advantage of that knowledge, but for many tests it doesn't help you a lot.



    If you're doing one of the common location-tests (Wilcoxon signed rank test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test) you lose almost nothing (power-wise) in a test for a location shift by ignoring the normality. [You need one extra observation for every 21 observations to match the power of the most powerful test when all its assumptions hold.]



    If you're dealing with some other tests is may matter a bit more (though some may matter even less). One example where it makes a somewhat bigger difference is using a Friedman test compared to the corresponding ANOVA test in a randomized blocks design.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
      – Alexis
      Nov 11 at 17:37






    • 1




      @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
      – Glen_b
      Nov 11 at 23:08






    • 1




      If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
      – Glen_b
      Nov 11 at 23:10







    • 1




      @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
      – Glen_b
      Nov 11 at 23:23











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "65"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f376394%2fwhat-will-happen-if-i-use-a-nonparametric-test-with-normally-distributed-data%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    12
    down vote













    In statistical analysis, if your data follow a parametric distribution, you should utilize the benefit of knowing the distribution, and employ the statistical methods based on that distribution.



    But sometimes we do not know the distribution of the random variable, so the nonparametric statistical methods were developed to embrace the wide range of the distributions while sacrificing some efficiency.



    Given you know the distribution of random variable and use the nonparametric statistical method, instead of parametric statistical methods based on knowing the distribution, it will be inefficient, i.e., the power of test will decrease, standard error will increase, and the confidence intervals will be wider than with the parametric method.






    share|cite|improve this answer


























      up vote
      12
      down vote













      In statistical analysis, if your data follow a parametric distribution, you should utilize the benefit of knowing the distribution, and employ the statistical methods based on that distribution.



      But sometimes we do not know the distribution of the random variable, so the nonparametric statistical methods were developed to embrace the wide range of the distributions while sacrificing some efficiency.



      Given you know the distribution of random variable and use the nonparametric statistical method, instead of parametric statistical methods based on knowing the distribution, it will be inefficient, i.e., the power of test will decrease, standard error will increase, and the confidence intervals will be wider than with the parametric method.






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        up vote
        12
        down vote










        up vote
        12
        down vote









        In statistical analysis, if your data follow a parametric distribution, you should utilize the benefit of knowing the distribution, and employ the statistical methods based on that distribution.



        But sometimes we do not know the distribution of the random variable, so the nonparametric statistical methods were developed to embrace the wide range of the distributions while sacrificing some efficiency.



        Given you know the distribution of random variable and use the nonparametric statistical method, instead of parametric statistical methods based on knowing the distribution, it will be inefficient, i.e., the power of test will decrease, standard error will increase, and the confidence intervals will be wider than with the parametric method.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        In statistical analysis, if your data follow a parametric distribution, you should utilize the benefit of knowing the distribution, and employ the statistical methods based on that distribution.



        But sometimes we do not know the distribution of the random variable, so the nonparametric statistical methods were developed to embrace the wide range of the distributions while sacrificing some efficiency.



        Given you know the distribution of random variable and use the nonparametric statistical method, instead of parametric statistical methods based on knowing the distribution, it will be inefficient, i.e., the power of test will decrease, standard error will increase, and the confidence intervals will be wider than with the parametric method.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Nov 11 at 16:36









        John Bentin

        14516




        14516










        answered Nov 11 at 3:11









        user158565

        4,4441316




        4,4441316






















            up vote
            12
            down vote













            If your data happened to be drawn from a normal population (and the other usual assumptions for an ordinary t-test apply), then the test works as it should (it's non-parametric, it's supposed to work). There's no drama on that score.



            If you know enough that you're confident in assuming normality you may want to take advantage of that knowledge, but for many tests it doesn't help you a lot.



            If you're doing one of the common location-tests (Wilcoxon signed rank test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test) you lose almost nothing (power-wise) in a test for a location shift by ignoring the normality. [You need one extra observation for every 21 observations to match the power of the most powerful test when all its assumptions hold.]



            If you're dealing with some other tests is may matter a bit more (though some may matter even less). One example where it makes a somewhat bigger difference is using a Friedman test compared to the corresponding ANOVA test in a randomized blocks design.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















            • Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
              – Alexis
              Nov 11 at 17:37






            • 1




              @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:08






            • 1




              If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:10







            • 1




              @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:23















            up vote
            12
            down vote













            If your data happened to be drawn from a normal population (and the other usual assumptions for an ordinary t-test apply), then the test works as it should (it's non-parametric, it's supposed to work). There's no drama on that score.



            If you know enough that you're confident in assuming normality you may want to take advantage of that knowledge, but for many tests it doesn't help you a lot.



            If you're doing one of the common location-tests (Wilcoxon signed rank test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test) you lose almost nothing (power-wise) in a test for a location shift by ignoring the normality. [You need one extra observation for every 21 observations to match the power of the most powerful test when all its assumptions hold.]



            If you're dealing with some other tests is may matter a bit more (though some may matter even less). One example where it makes a somewhat bigger difference is using a Friedman test compared to the corresponding ANOVA test in a randomized blocks design.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















            • Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
              – Alexis
              Nov 11 at 17:37






            • 1




              @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:08






            • 1




              If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:10







            • 1




              @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:23













            up vote
            12
            down vote










            up vote
            12
            down vote









            If your data happened to be drawn from a normal population (and the other usual assumptions for an ordinary t-test apply), then the test works as it should (it's non-parametric, it's supposed to work). There's no drama on that score.



            If you know enough that you're confident in assuming normality you may want to take advantage of that knowledge, but for many tests it doesn't help you a lot.



            If you're doing one of the common location-tests (Wilcoxon signed rank test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test) you lose almost nothing (power-wise) in a test for a location shift by ignoring the normality. [You need one extra observation for every 21 observations to match the power of the most powerful test when all its assumptions hold.]



            If you're dealing with some other tests is may matter a bit more (though some may matter even less). One example where it makes a somewhat bigger difference is using a Friedman test compared to the corresponding ANOVA test in a randomized blocks design.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            If your data happened to be drawn from a normal population (and the other usual assumptions for an ordinary t-test apply), then the test works as it should (it's non-parametric, it's supposed to work). There's no drama on that score.



            If you know enough that you're confident in assuming normality you may want to take advantage of that knowledge, but for many tests it doesn't help you a lot.



            If you're doing one of the common location-tests (Wilcoxon signed rank test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test) you lose almost nothing (power-wise) in a test for a location shift by ignoring the normality. [You need one extra observation for every 21 observations to match the power of the most powerful test when all its assumptions hold.]



            If you're dealing with some other tests is may matter a bit more (though some may matter even less). One example where it makes a somewhat bigger difference is using a Friedman test compared to the corresponding ANOVA test in a randomized blocks design.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Nov 11 at 23:16

























            answered Nov 11 at 6:15









            Glen_b

            207k22395732




            207k22395732











            • Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
              – Alexis
              Nov 11 at 17:37






            • 1




              @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:08






            • 1




              If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:10







            • 1




              @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:23

















            • Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
              – Alexis
              Nov 11 at 17:37






            • 1




              @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:08






            • 1




              If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:10







            • 1




              @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
              – Glen_b
              Nov 11 at 23:23
















            Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
            – Alexis
            Nov 11 at 17:37




            Aren't those tests are only location shift tests if the distributes have the same shape (normal here) and the same variance?
            – Alexis
            Nov 11 at 17:37




            1




            1




            @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
            – Glen_b
            Nov 11 at 23:08




            @Alexis The assumption under the null for a permutation test is exchangeability (so permuting of labels/signs etc as needed doesn't change the distribution of the statistic); typically the slightly stronger "independent identically distributed" is assumed for H0, giving convenient significance level calculations for rank tests. Combined with a location-shift alternative (which is already specified in my answer), this gives the identify of shape and spread you mention. Perhaps I need to write down algebraically what "location shift alternative" means algebraically so people can see it's covered
            – Glen_b
            Nov 11 at 23:08




            1




            1




            If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
            – Glen_b
            Nov 11 at 23:10





            If we're not willing to specify a location shift alternative (or at the least to say "that's what we're interested in seeing the power against), I'd say we shouldn't be holding up a t-test as a basis of comparison in the first place, since it would also be impacted if we didn't have a location-shift alternative. If we abandon the location-shift part of the comparison, until we then specify a sequence of alternatives we're interested in, we're left with a question that specifies too little to compute power on.
            – Glen_b
            Nov 11 at 23:10





            1




            1




            @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
            – Glen_b
            Nov 11 at 23:23





            @Alexis Actually, on reflection I think I'll include both some algebra and more explanation; it's important to be clear what is implied by the circumstances already given in the question and answer, unfortunately I can't do it right now. Thanks for your comment, it makes it clear I don't explain enough here.
            – Glen_b
            Nov 11 at 23:23


















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f376394%2fwhat-will-happen-if-i-use-a-nonparametric-test-with-normally-distributed-data%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Top Tejano songwriter Luis Silva dead of heart attack at 64

            ReactJS Fetched API data displays live - need Data displayed static

            Evgeni Malkin