# Two way ANOVA - overview

This page offers structured overviews of one or more selected methods. Add additional methods for comparisons by clicking on the dropdown button in the right-hand column. To practice with a specific method click the button at the bottom row of the table

Two way ANOVA
Regression (OLS)
Sign test
Independent/grouping variablesIndependent variablesIndependent variable
Two categorical, the first with $I$ independent groups and the second with $J$ independent groups ($I \geqslant 2$, $J \geqslant 2$)One or more quantitative of interval or ratio level and/or one or more categorical with independent groups, transformed into code variables2 paired groups
Dependent variableDependent variableDependent variable
One quantitative of interval or ratio levelOne quantitative of interval or ratio levelOne of ordinal level
Null hypothesisNull hypothesisNull hypothesis
ANOVA $F$ tests:
• H0 for main and interaction effects together (model): no main effects and interaction effect
• H0 for independent variable A: no main effect for A
• H0 for independent variable B: no main effect for B
• H0 for the interaction term: no interaction effect between A and B
Like in one way ANOVA, we can also perform $t$ tests for specific contrasts and multiple comparisons. This is more advanced stuff.
$F$ test for the complete regression model:
• H0: $\beta_1 = \beta_2 = \ldots = \beta_K = 0$
or equivalenty
• H0: the variance explained by all the independent variables together (the complete model) is 0 in the population, i.e. $\rho^2 = 0$
$t$ test for individual regression coefficient $\beta_k$:
• H0: $\beta_k = 0$
in the regression equation $\mu_y = \beta_0 + \beta_1 \times x_1 + \beta_2 \times x_2 + \ldots + \beta_K \times x_K$. Here $x_i$ represents independent variable $i$, $\beta_i$ is the regression weight for independent variable $x_i$, and $\mu_y$ represents the population mean of the dependent variable $y$ given the scores on the independent variables.
• H0: P(first score of a pair exceeds second score of a pair) = P(second score of a pair exceeds first score of a pair)
If the dependent variable is measured on a continuous scale, this can also be formulated as:
• H0: the population median of the difference scores is equal to zero
A difference score is the difference between the first score of a pair and the second score of a pair.
Alternative hypothesisAlternative hypothesisAlternative hypothesis
ANOVA $F$ tests:
• H1 for main and interaction effects together (model): there is a main effect for A, and/or for B, and/or an interaction effect
• H1 for independent variable A: there is a main effect for A
• H1 for independent variable B: there is a main effect for B
• H1 for the interaction term: there is an interaction effect between A and B
$F$ test for the complete regression model:
• H1: not all population regression coefficients are 0
or equivalenty
• H1: the variance explained by all the independent variables together (the complete model) is larger than 0 in the population, i.e. $\rho^2 > 0$
$t$ test for individual regression coefficient $\beta_k$:
• H1 two sided: $\beta_k \neq 0$
• H1 right sided: $\beta_k > 0$
• H1 left sided: $\beta_k < 0$
• H1 two sided: P(first score of a pair exceeds second score of a pair) $\neq$ P(second score of a pair exceeds first score of a pair)
• H1 right sided: P(first score of a pair exceeds second score of a pair) > P(second score of a pair exceeds first score of a pair)
• H1 left sided: P(first score of a pair exceeds second score of a pair) < P(second score of a pair exceeds first score of a pair)
If the dependent variable is measured on a continuous scale, this can also be formulated as:
• H1 two sided: the population median of the difference scores is different from zero
• H1 right sided: the population median of the difference scores is larger than zero
• H1 left sided: the population median of the difference scores is smaller than zero
AssumptionsAssumptionsAssumptions
• Within each of the $I \times J$ populations, the scores on the dependent variable are normally distributed
• The standard deviation of the scores on the dependent variable is the same in each of the $I \times J$ populations
• For each of the $I \times J$ groups, the sample is an independent and simple random sample from the population defined by that group. That is, within and between groups, observations are independent of one another
• Equal sample sizes for each group make the interpretation of the ANOVA output easier (unequal sample sizes result in overlap in the sum of squares; this is advanced stuff)
• In the population, the residuals are normally distributed at each combination of values of the independent variables
• In the population, the standard deviation $\sigma$ of the residuals is the same for each combination of values of the independent variables (homoscedasticity)
• In the population, the relationship between the independent variables and the mean of the dependent variable $\mu_y$ is linear. If this linearity assumption holds, the mean of the residuals is 0 for each combination of values of the independent variables
• The residuals are independent of one another
Often ignored additional assumption:
• Variables are measured without error
Also pay attention to:
• Multicollinearity
• Outliers
• Sample of pairs is a simple random sample from the population of pairs. That is, pairs are independent of one another
Test statisticTest statisticTest statistic
For main and interaction effects together (model):
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square model}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
For independent variable A:
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square A}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
For independent variable B:
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square B}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
For the interaction term:
• $F = \dfrac{\mbox{mean square interaction}}{\mbox{mean square error}}$
Note: mean square error is also known as mean square residual or mean square within.
$F$ test for the complete regression model:
• \begin{aligned}[t] F &= \dfrac{\sum (\hat{y}_j - \bar{y})^2 / K}{\sum (y_j - \hat{y}_j)^2 / (N - K - 1)}\\ &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares model} / \mbox{degrees of freedom model}}{\mbox{sum of squares error} / \mbox{degrees of freedom error}}\\ &= \dfrac{\mbox{mean square model}}{\mbox{mean square error}} \end{aligned}
where $\hat{y}_j$ is the predicted score on the dependent variable $y$ of subject $j$, $\bar{y}$ is the mean of $y$, $y_j$ is the score on $y$ of subject $j$, $N$ is the total sample size, and $K$ is the number of independent variables.
$t$ test for individual $\beta_k$:
• $t = \dfrac{b_k}{SE_{b_k}}$
• If only one independent variable:
$SE_{b_1} = \dfrac{\sqrt{\sum (y_j - \hat{y}_j)^2 / (N - 2)}}{\sqrt{\sum (x_j - \bar{x})^2}} = \dfrac{s}{\sqrt{\sum (x_j - \bar{x})^2}}$
with $s$ the sample standard deviation of the residuals, $x_j$ the score of subject $j$ on the independent variable $x$, and $\bar{x}$ the mean of $x$. For models with more than one independent variable, computing $SE_{b_k}$ is more complicated.
Note 1: mean square model is also known as mean square regression, and mean square error is also known as mean square residual.
Note 2: if there is only one independent variable in the model ($K = 1$), the $F$ test for the complete regression model is equivalent to the two sided $t$ test for $\beta_1.$
$W =$ number of difference scores that is larger than 0
Pooled standard deviationSample standard deviation of the residuals $s$n.a.
\begin{aligned} s_p &= \sqrt{\dfrac{\sum\nolimits_{subjects} (\mbox{subject's score} - \mbox{its group mean})^2}{N - (I \times J)}}\\ &= \sqrt{\dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares error}}{\mbox{degrees of freedom error}}}\\ &= \sqrt{\mbox{mean square error}} \end{aligned} \begin{aligned} s &= \sqrt{\dfrac{\sum (y_j - \hat{y}_j)^2}{N - K - 1}}\\ &= \sqrt{\dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares error}}{\mbox{degrees of freedom error}}}\\ &= \sqrt{\mbox{mean square error}} \end{aligned}-
Sampling distribution of $F$ if H0 were trueSampling distribution of $F$ and of $t$ if H0 were trueSampling distribution of $W$ if H0 were true
For main and interaction effects together (model):
• $F$ distribution with $(I - 1) + (J - 1) + (I - 1) \times (J - 1)$ (df model, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
For independent variable A:
• $F$ distribution with $I - 1$ (df A, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
For independent variable B:
• $F$ distribution with $J - 1$ (df B, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
For the interaction term:
• $F$ distribution with $(I - 1) \times (J - 1)$ (df interaction, numerator) and $N - (I \times J)$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
Here $N$ is the total sample size.
Sampling distribution of $F$:
• $F$ distribution with $K$ (df model, numerator) and $N - K - 1$ (df error, denominator) degrees of freedom
Sampling distribution of $t$:
• $t$ distribution with $N - K - 1$ (df error) degrees of freedom
The exact distribution of $W$ under the null hypothesis is the Binomial($n$, $P$) distribution, with $n =$ number of positive differences $+$ number of negative differences, and $P = 0.5$.

If $n$ is large, $W$ is approximately normally distributed under the null hypothesis, with mean $nP = n \times 0.5$ and standard deviation $\sqrt{nP(1-P)} = \sqrt{n \times 0.5(1 - 0.5)}$. Hence, if $n$ is large, the standardized test statistic $$z = \frac{W - n \times 0.5}{\sqrt{n \times 0.5(1 - 0.5)}}$$ follows approximately the standard normal distribution if the null hypothesis were true.
Significant?Significant?Significant?
• Check if $F$ observed in sample is equal to or larger than critical value $F^*$ or
• Find $p$ value corresponding to observed $F$ and check if it is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$
$F$ test:
• Check if $F$ observed in sample is equal to or larger than critical value $F^*$ or
• Find $p$ value corresponding to observed $F$ and check if it is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$
$t$ Test two sided:
$t$ Test right sided:
$t$ Test left sided:
If $n$ is small, the table for the binomial distribution should be used:
Two sided:
• Check if $W$ observed in sample is in the rejection region or
• Find two sided $p$ value corresponding to observed $W$ and check if it is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$
Right sided:
• Check if $W$ observed in sample is in the rejection region or
• Find right sided $p$ value corresponding to observed $W$ and check if it is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$
Left sided:
• Check if $W$ observed in sample is in the rejection region or
• Find left sided $p$ value corresponding to observed $W$ and check if it is equal to or smaller than $\alpha$

If $n$ is large, the table for standard normal probabilities can be used:
Two sided:
Right sided:
Left sided:
n.a.$C\%$ confidence interval for $\beta_k$ and for $\mu_y$, $C\%$ prediction interval for $y_{new}$n.a.
-Confidence interval for $\beta_k$:
• $b_k \pm t^* \times SE_{b_k}$
• If only one independent variable:
$SE_{b_1} = \dfrac{\sqrt{\sum (y_j - \hat{y}_j)^2 / (N - 2)}}{\sqrt{\sum (x_j - \bar{x})^2}} = \dfrac{s}{\sqrt{\sum (x_j - \bar{x})^2}}$
Confidence interval for $\mu_y$, the population mean of $y$ given the values on the independent variables:
• $\hat{y} \pm t^* \times SE_{\hat{y}}$
• If only one independent variable:
$SE_{\hat{y}} = s \sqrt{\dfrac{1}{N} + \dfrac{(x^* - \bar{x})^2}{\sum (x_j - \bar{x})^2}}$
Prediction interval for $y_{new}$, the score on $y$ of a future respondent:
• $\hat{y} \pm t^* \times SE_{y_{new}}$
• If only one independent variable:
$SE_{y_{new}} = s \sqrt{1 + \dfrac{1}{N} + \dfrac{(x^* - \bar{x})^2}{\sum (x_j - \bar{x})^2}}$
In all formulas, the critical value $t^*$ is the value under the $t_{N - K - 1}$ distribution with the area $C / 100$ between $-t^*$ and $t^*$ (e.g. $t^*$ = 2.086 for a 95% confidence interval when df = 20).
-
Effect sizeEffect sizen.a.
• Proportion variance explained $R^2$:
Proportion variance of the dependent variable $y$ explained by the independent variables and the interaction effect together:
\begin{align} R^2 &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares model}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}} \end{align} $R^2$ is the proportion variance explained in the sample. It is a positively biased estimate of the proportion variance explained in the population.

• Proportion variance explained $\eta^2$:
Proportion variance of the dependent variable $y$ explained by an independent variable or interaction effect:
\begin{align} \eta^2_A &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares A}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}}\\ \\ \eta^2_B &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares B}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}}\\ \\ \eta^2_{int} &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares int}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}} \end{align} $\eta^2$ is the proportion variance explained in the sample. It is a positively biased estimate of the proportion variance explained in the population.

• Proportion variance explained $\omega^2$:
Corrects for the positive bias in $\eta^2$ and is equal to:
\begin{align} \omega^2_A &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares A} - \mbox{degrees of freedom A} \times \mbox{mean square error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total} + \mbox{mean square error}}\\ \\ \omega^2_B &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares B} - \mbox{degrees of freedom B} \times \mbox{mean square error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total} + \mbox{mean square error}}\\ \\ \omega^2_{int} &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares int} - \mbox{degrees of freedom int} \times \mbox{mean square error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total} + \mbox{mean square error}}\\ \end{align} $\omega^2$ is a better estimate of the explained variance in the population than $\eta^2$. Only for balanced designs (equal sample sizes).

• Proportion variance explained $\eta^2_{partial}$: \begin{align} \eta^2_{partial\,A} &= \frac{\mbox{sum of squares A}}{\mbox{sum of squares A} + \mbox{sum of squares error}}\\ \\ \eta^2_{partial\,B} &= \frac{\mbox{sum of squares B}}{\mbox{sum of squares B} + \mbox{sum of squares error}}\\ \\ \eta^2_{partial\,int} &= \frac{\mbox{sum of squares int}}{\mbox{sum of squares int} + \mbox{sum of squares error}} \end{align}
Complete model:
• Proportion variance explained $R^2$:
Proportion variance of the dependent variable $y$ explained by the sample regression equation (the independent variables):
\begin{align} R^2 &= \dfrac{\sum (\hat{y}_j - \bar{y})^2}{\sum (y_j - \bar{y})^2}\\ &= \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares model}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}}\\ &= 1 - \dfrac{\mbox{sum of squares error}}{\mbox{sum of squares total}}\\ &= r(y, \hat{y})^2 \end{align}
$R^2$ is the proportion variance explained in the sample by the sample regression equation. It is a positively biased estimate of the proportion variance explained in the population by the population regression equation, $\rho^2$. If there is only one independent variable, $R^2 = r^2$: the correlation between the independent variable $x$ and dependent variable $y$ squared.
• Wherry's $R^2$ / shrunken $R^2$:
Corrects for the positive bias in $R^2$ and is equal to $$R^2_W = 1 - \frac{N - 1}{N - K - 1}(1 - R^2)$$
$R^2_W$ is a less biased estimate than $R^2$ of the proportion variance explained in the population by the population regression equation, $\rho^2.$
• Stein's $R^2$:
Estimates the proportion of variance in $y$ that we expect the current sample regression equation to explain in a different sample drawn from the same population. It is equal to $$R^2_S = 1 - \frac{(N - 1)(N - 2)(N + 1)}{(N - K - 1)(N - K - 2)(N)}(1 - R^2)$$
Per independent variable:
• Correlation squared $r^2_k$: the proportion of the total variance in the dependent variable $y$ that is explained by the independent variable $x_k$, not corrected for the other independent variables in the model
• Semi-partial correlation squared $sr^2_k$: the proportion of the total variance in the dependent variable $y$ that is uniquely explained by the independent variable $x_k$, beyond the part that is already explained by the other independent variables in the model
• Partial correlation squared $pr^2_k$: the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable $y$ not explained by the other independent variables, that is uniquely explained by the independent variable $x_k$
-
n.a.Visual representationn.a.
-Regression equations with: -
ANOVA tableANOVA tablen.a.
-
Equivalent ton.a.Equivalent to
OLS regression with two categorical independent variables and the interaction term, transformed into $(I - 1)$ + $(J - 1)$ + $(I - 1) \times (J - 1)$ code variables.- Two sided sign test is equivalent to
Example contextExample contextExample context
Is the average mental health score different between people from a low, moderate, and high economic class? And is the average mental health score different between men and women? And is there an interaction effect between economic class and gender?Can mental health be predicted from fysical health, economic class, and gender?Do people tend to score higher on mental health after a mindfulness course?
SPSSSPSSSPSS
Analyze > General Linear Model > Univariate...
• Put your dependent (quantitative) variable in the box below Dependent Variable and your two independent (grouping) variables in the box below Fixed Factor(s)
Analyze > Regression > Linear...
• Put your dependent variable in the box below Dependent and your independent (predictor) variables in the box below Independent(s)
Analyze > Nonparametric Tests > Legacy Dialogs > 2 Related Samples...
• Put the two paired variables in the boxes below Variable 1 and Variable 2
• Under Test Type, select the Sign test
JamoviJamoviJamovi
ANOVA > ANOVA
• Put your dependent (quantitative) variable in the box below Dependent Variable and your two independent (grouping) variables in the box below Fixed Factors
Regression > Linear Regression
• Put your dependent variable in the box below Dependent Variable and your independent variables of interval/ratio level in the box below Covariates
• If you also have code (dummy) variables as independent variables, you can put these in the box below Covariates as well
• Instead of transforming your categorical independent variable(s) into code variables, you can also put the untransformed categorical independent variables in the box below Factors. Jamovi will then make the code variables for you 'behind the scenes'
Jamovi does not have a specific option for the sign test. However, you can do the Friedman test instead. The $p$ value resulting from this Friedman test is equivalent to the two sided $p$ value that would have resulted from the sign test. Go to:

ANOVA > Repeated Measures ANOVA - Friedman
• Put the two paired variables in the box below Measures
Practice questionsPractice questionsPractice questions