1956
DOI: 10.2307/2985421
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Missing Values in Experiments Analysed on Automatic Computers

Abstract: Mr Healy and Mr Westmacott describe a general technique for dealing with observations missing from block experiments analysed on automatic computers. When more than one observation is missing the technique is simpler than other methods hitherto described and has been proved in practice to be satisfactorily fast. It is applicable to any analysis in which least‐squares estimates are derived.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
73
0

Year Published

1973
1973
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 147 publications
(73 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
73
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Perfect homogeneity-would give an e of one, but the e values were all less than one, causing an increase in the critical i^-value. The ANOVA was modified for missing values using the method of Healy & Westmacott (1956, Genstat 5 Committee, 1989, …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perfect homogeneity-would give an e of one, but the e values were all less than one, causing an increase in the critical i^-value. The ANOVA was modified for missing values using the method of Healy & Westmacott (1956, Genstat 5 Committee, 1989, …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Entry means and error mean squares were used for further combined analyses of variance (Cochran and Cox, 1957). Outliers were detected according to Anscombe and Tukey (1963) and if significant at P= 0.05, they were declared to be missing values and estimated using the iterative method of Healy and Westmacott (1956). There were less than 1% of outliers in the whole data set.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some articles such as those concerned with the multivariate normal (Afifi & Elashoff, 1966; Anderson, 1957;Hartley & Hocking, 1971;Hocking & Smith, 1968;Wilks, 1932), "missing at random" seems to mean that each item in the data matrix is equally likely to be missing. In other articles such as those dealing with the analysis of variance (Hartley, 1956;Healy & westmacott, 1956;Rubin, 1972;Wilkinson, 1958), "missing at random" seems to mean that observations of the dependent variable are missing without regard to the actual values that would have been observed. Similarly, "missing at random lt apparently can mean missing according to a preplanned experimental design (Hocking & Smith, 1972-;Trawinski & Bargmann, 1964).…”
Section: "Missing At Random" As Used In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%