<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267082#M14063</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;But also beware that the tests here are immensely over-powered to detect differences. &amp;nbsp;You will learn far more from the QQ plot. &amp;nbsp;That long flat part at the beginning is evidence that there is a mixture here, and a rough look at the data makes me think that you are using a lower limit of quantitation value for a lot of observations. &amp;nbsp;If that is the case, there are a number of ways to address the issues of analysis.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also, the assumptions of ANOVA (and of the t test) are &lt;U&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;not&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/U&gt; that the data are normally distributed, but that the errors/residuals are normally distributed. &amp;nbsp;Try running the analysis on the transformed data, and then testing the residuals for normality.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;With a sample size this large, and the known conservatism of tests for normality, p values in this range should probably not be regarded as strong evidence for lack of normality of the residuals, which the ANOVA is relative robust to, in any case.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:22:20 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-28T19:22:20Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267018#M14055</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I want to do a t-test and also ANOVA. But my data is extremely positive skewed.&amp;nbsp; I used log transformation to normalize it. Then I did a normality test.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The three tests gave different P-values. For Kolmogorov-Smirnov, the P-value is &amp;gt;0.05, but the other two tests are &amp;lt;0.05.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;sample size 67994. Is this transformation acceptable for normality considering t-test and anova analysis? &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-sas"&gt;proc univariate data = test1 normal;
  class gender;
  var newvar;
  histogram /normal kernel;
  qqplot newvar;
run;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;TABLE class="table" summary="Procedure Univariate: Goodness of Fit" frame="box" rules="all" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0"&gt;
&lt;THEAD&gt;
&lt;TR&gt;
&lt;TH class="c b header" colspan="5" scope="colgroup"&gt;Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Normal Distribution&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;TR&gt;
&lt;TH class="l b header" scope="col"&gt;Test&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TH class="c b header" colspan="2" scope="colgroup"&gt;Statistic&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TH class="c b header" colspan="2" scope="colgroup"&gt;p Value&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;/THEAD&gt;
&lt;TBODY&gt;
&lt;TR&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;Kolmogorov-Smirnov&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;D&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TD class="r data"&gt;0.09694082&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;Pr &amp;gt; D&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TD class="r data"&gt;0.119&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;TR&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;Cramer-von Mises&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;W-Sq&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TD class="r data"&gt;0.14977297&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;Pr &amp;gt; W-Sq&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TD class="r data"&gt;0.024&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;TR&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;Anderson-Darling&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;A-Sq&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TD class="r data"&gt;0.98653289&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;TH class="l rowheader" scope="row"&gt;Pr &amp;gt; A-Sq&lt;/TH&gt;
&lt;TD class="r data"&gt;0.013&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;/TBODY&gt;
&lt;/TABLE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/2961iF13988AC10DEE2B7/image-size/original?v=mpbl-1&amp;amp;px=-1" alt="Capture.PNG" title="Capture.PNG" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/2960iE21A7644AFFB9074/image-size/original?v=mpbl-1&amp;amp;px=-1" alt="Capture1.PNG" title="Capture1.PNG" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:06:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267018#M14055</guid>
      <dc:creator>fengyuwuzu</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-28T16:06:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267074#M14062</link>
      <description>You should go for AD than KS , as KS is more centric the middle of the data .&lt;BR /&gt;Here is one research artical which may help you.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267205556_Power_Comparisons_of_Shapiro-Wilk_Kolmogorov-Smirnov_Lilliefors_and_Anderson-Darling_Tests" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267205556_Power_Comparisons_of_Shapiro-Wilk_Kolmogorov-Smirnov_Lilliefors_and_Anderson-Darling_Tests&lt;/A&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:39:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267074#M14062</guid>
      <dc:creator>pearsoninst</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-28T18:39:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267082#M14063</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;But also beware that the tests here are immensely over-powered to detect differences. &amp;nbsp;You will learn far more from the QQ plot. &amp;nbsp;That long flat part at the beginning is evidence that there is a mixture here, and a rough look at the data makes me think that you are using a lower limit of quantitation value for a lot of observations. &amp;nbsp;If that is the case, there are a number of ways to address the issues of analysis.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Also, the assumptions of ANOVA (and of the t test) are &lt;U&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;not&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/U&gt; that the data are normally distributed, but that the errors/residuals are normally distributed. &amp;nbsp;Try running the analysis on the transformed data, and then testing the residuals for normality.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;With a sample size this large, and the known conservatism of tests for normality, p values in this range should probably not be regarded as strong evidence for lack of normality of the residuals, which the ANOVA is relative robust to, in any case.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:22:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267082#M14063</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-28T19:22:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267100#M14067</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You do not need o transform your variable. The UNIVARIATE procedure can &lt;A href="http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/procstat/68142/HTML/default/viewer.htm#procstat_univariate_examples22.htm" target="_self"&gt;fit a lognormal and other skewed distributions&lt;/A&gt;.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As Steve points out, the Q-Q plot contains the graphical information about the fit. To learn more about the Q-Q plot and how to create it in SAS, see &lt;A href="http://blogs.sas.com/content/iml/2011/10/28/modeling-the-distribution-of-data-create-a-qq-plot.html" target="_self"&gt;"Modeling the distribution of data? Create a Q-Q plot."&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 20:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267100#M14067</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rick_SAS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-28T20:07:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267126#M14068</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would not use a test for normality with 68,000 observations. You will almost always get a 'significant' result. Graphic appraisal is best.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 22:09:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267126#M14068</guid>
      <dc:creator>lvm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-28T22:09:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267159#M14073</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Compare the p-value you get with ANOVA or ttest on the log-transformed data with the p-value from Wilcoxon rank sum (non parametric) test from proc NPAR1WAY on the untransformed data. The later should confirm the former.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 03:21:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267159#M14073</guid>
      <dc:creator>PGStats</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-29T03:21:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Normality Test: different p-values from different test</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267222#M14075</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I like this approach&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/462"&gt;@PGStats﻿&lt;/a&gt;, except all of the ties with the lower bound mean a loss of power. &amp;nbsp;I would suggest a tobit analysis on the log transformed data (say with PROC QLIM), but that might&amp;nbsp;make a newcomer to SAS run screaming, I'm afraid.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 13:38:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Normality-Test-different-p-values-from-different-test/m-p/267222#M14075</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-29T13:38:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

