Changes in Variance and the Detection of Trends

Background: Tests for a trend in location are appropriate when there is an ordered alternative such as, for example, when it is assumed that the effect does not decrease with increasing doses of a drug or fertilizer. Classical trend tests for normally distributed data as well as the nonparametric Jonckheere trend test can have inflated type I error rates when variances differ between groups. Here, different approaches suggested to handle heterogeneous variances are investigated in combination with the Williams trend test. Methods: A simulation study was performed to compare the Jonckheere trend test with competing tests. The different tests were investigated for normal and non-normal data and also applied to a data set on sizes of walnuts opened by birds in various stages of a winter. Results: With one exception, all investigated trend tests can have an inflated type I error rate when variances differ. Only a nonparametric multiple contrast test based on relative effects showed an acceptable type I error rate in all scenarios considered in the simulation. Conclusions: The Williams trend test in combination with the nonparametric multiple contrast test based on relative effects can be suggested for routine use. With this procedure, an increase in variance cannot cause a significant result in the test for trend.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Stats
Published
2026-06-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/stats9040067
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Changes in Variance and the Detection of Trends

Markus Neuhäuser
Stats
Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
article

Changes in Variance and the Detection of Trends

Markus Neuhäuser
article en

Abstract

Background: Tests for a trend in location are appropriate when there is an ordered alternative such as, for example, when it is assumed that the effect does not decrease with increasing doses of a drug or fertilizer. Classical trend tests for normally distributed data as well as the nonparametric Jonckheere trend test can have inflated type I error rates when variances differ between groups. Here, different approaches suggested to handle heterogeneous variances are investigated in combination with the Williams trend test. Methods: A simulation study was performed to compare the Jonckheere trend test with competing tests. The different tests were investigated for normal and non-normal data and also applied to a data set on sizes of walnuts opened by birds in various stages of a winter. Results: With one exception, all investigated trend tests can have an inflated type I error rate when variances differ. Only a nonparametric multiple contrast test based on relative effects showed an acceptable type I error rate in all scenarios considered in the simulation. Conclusions: The Williams trend test in combination with the nonparametric multiple contrast test based on relative effects can be suggested for routine use. With this procedure, an increase in variance cannot cause a significant result in the test for trend.

StatsVol. 9(4)
Koblenz University of Applied Sciences (DE)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.