Why shift the Mann Whitney distribution?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter fadecomic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Distribution Shift
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Mann-Whitney test, specifically the rationale behind shifting the U distribution. The U statistic represents the difference between the observed sum of ranks and the maximum possible sum of ranks, which is solely dependent on sample sizes. The expected value of the U statistic is calculated as (n_a * n_b) / 2, leading to a central value of (n_a * n_b) / 2 for the distribution. The query raised is about the necessity of this shift compared to the Wilcoxon test, which tabulates based on the sum of ranks.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of non-parametric statistical tests
  • Familiarity with the Mann-Whitney U test
  • Knowledge of rank-based statistics
  • Basic concepts of hypothesis testing
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between the Mann-Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test
  • Study the derivation of the U statistic and its expected value
  • Explore applications of non-parametric tests in real-world scenarios
  • Learn about the assumptions and limitations of the Mann-Whitney test
USEFUL FOR

Statisticians, data analysts, researchers, and students interested in non-parametric statistical methods and hypothesis testing.

fadecomic
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I'm reading up on the Mann Whitney test, and I can't wrap my head around one thing. Most of the test makes perfect sense. If two samples come from populations with similar medians, then the sum of ranks of both of those populations should hover around some expected value. The "T" or "U" statistic, depending on what you're reading, is determined, and one determines whether or not U falls within a certain interval. Fine. U is defined as the difference of the observed sum of ranks and either the minimum or maximum possible value of the sum of ranks (doesn't matter). The U distribution is parameterized by the two sample sizes and nothing more, as is the maximum possible U. That means the max possible U is nothing but a shift of the distribution. Why bother? Is there some advantage to doing it that way? Why not tabulate the distribution based on the sum of ranks only (which is done--it's called the "Wilcoxan test")?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Incidentally, the expected value for the U statistic is (n_an_b)/2, which is easy to prove. So why does the Mann-Whitney test require a statistic that is shifted to a central value of (n_an_b)/2?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K