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")?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Thanks.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Why shift the Mann Whitney distribution?

Loading...

Similar Threads - shift Mann Whitney | Date |
---|---|

How to generally express a shifted PDF ? | Dec 16, 2013 |

Mann-Whitney U test | May 6, 2013 |

Automated shifting correlation test | Jun 16, 2012 |

Inverse of shifted lognormal | Nov 20, 2011 |

How to calculate parameters of shifted exponential density from a set of measurements | Apr 19, 2010 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**