Which is a better statistic to use comparison of means (ANOVA) or Effect size statistics in quantifying the effects of different nutrient types, and amount on growth responses of aquatic animals reared under controlled conditions. I am confused on the comparative statistical value of mean comparisons by ANOVA and Effect size statistics. When to use these tools and which is more statistically efficient, relevant and true.
ANOVA is the best. However, you could perform both tests and see which one gives you results that satisfy your goal.
Elly
ANOVA is better . use the Duncan multiple range test for means after ANOVA.
Hi Guys,
Thanks for the answers, but I'm still confused if there is really a logical reason or a scientific reason why ANOVA is better than the Effect size statistic. I'm just wondering if what test is better since sometimes ANOVA and the effect size results are in complete disagreement.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Bioecology
- Systems Ecology
- Landscape Ecology
- Connectivity