<?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 Non-paramentric: reporting Wilcoxon Two-sample tests in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Non-paramentric-reporting-Wilcoxon-Two-sample-tests/m-p/36085#M1509</link>
    <description>Hi.  I am doing a lot of non-parametric testing.  I am running exact Wilcoxon two-sample tests.  However, I am not sure what to report from the SAS output, specifically which "statistic" to report.  The outprint provides an "S" statistic and a "Z" statistic, and I'm not sure which one should be reported alng with the p-value.  I don't even know what each means.  Any advice you can give would be appreciated.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
As well, why is the Wilcoxon p-value different than the Kruskal Wallis test p-value?  I wlways thought these two tests were comparable with a 2-level independent variable.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thanks again.</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 02:51:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>deleted_user</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-05-25T02:51:08Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Non-paramentric: reporting Wilcoxon Two-sample tests</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Non-paramentric-reporting-Wilcoxon-Two-sample-tests/m-p/36085#M1509</link>
      <description>Hi.  I am doing a lot of non-parametric testing.  I am running exact Wilcoxon two-sample tests.  However, I am not sure what to report from the SAS output, specifically which "statistic" to report.  The outprint provides an "S" statistic and a "Z" statistic, and I'm not sure which one should be reported alng with the p-value.  I don't even know what each means.  Any advice you can give would be appreciated.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
As well, why is the Wilcoxon p-value different than the Kruskal Wallis test p-value?  I wlways thought these two tests were comparable with a 2-level independent variable.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thanks again.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 02:51:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Non-paramentric-reporting-Wilcoxon-Two-sample-tests/m-p/36085#M1509</guid>
      <dc:creator>deleted_user</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-05-25T02:51:08Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Non-paramentric: reporting Wilcoxon Two-sample tests</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Non-paramentric-reporting-Wilcoxon-Two-sample-tests/m-p/36086#M1510</link>
      <description>First, the standard Wilcoxon (or Mann-Whitney) two sample test is equivalent to the Kruskal-Wallis test when there are just two groups.  The p-values are not the same because the normal approximation includes a continuity correction.  Form the documentation:  "The normal approximation includes a continuity correction. To remove this, you can specify the CORRECT=NO option. "&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
The "S" statistic is pretty much useless for external reports because it's magnitude is a function of the sample size.  There is a one-to-one correspondence between the uncorrected Z statistic and the p-value, so I generally just report the p-value.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Doc Muhlbaier&lt;BR /&gt;
Duke</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 14:02:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Non-paramentric-reporting-Wilcoxon-Two-sample-tests/m-p/36086#M1510</guid>
      <dc:creator>Doc_Duke</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-05-25T14:02:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

