KACD
Articles
- Page Path
- HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 39(2); 2014 > Article
- Open Lecture on Statistics Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)-exploring possible interaction between factors
- Hae-Young Kim
-
Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics 2014;39(2):143-147.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2014.39.2.143
Published online: March 21, 2014
Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science & Department of Public Health Science, Graduate School, Korea University, Seoul, Korea.
- Correspondence to Hae-Young Kim, DDS, PhD. Associate Professor, Department of Dental Laboratory Science & Engineering, Korea University College of Health Science, San 1 Jeongneung 3-dong, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, Korea 136-703. TEL, +82-2-940-2845; FAX, +82-2-909-3502, kimhaey@korea.ac.kr
©Copyights 2014. The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
- 81 Views
- 3 Download
- 33 Crossref
When we have a continuous outcome e.g., bonding strength and two categorical explanatory variables such as 4 different resin types and 2 different curing light sources, usually we consider applying the two-way ANOVA for analyzing the relationships. However because implementing the two-way ANOVA is relatively complicated, some clinical researchers prefer to apply the one-way ANOVA for one factor on each level of the other factor, repeatedly. They often insist that they are interested only in one factor (e.g., manipulation methods) and are not interested in the other factor (e.g., brands), claiming that the one-way ANOVA is the more appropriate strategy. Even though the trial with a variety of brands may be considered as a simple way of generalization among various brand types, possible different effects of materials of different brands can never be detected by the one-way ANOVA. Actually materials of different brands may have slightly different ingredient compositions which may elicit different effects on the other factor. Application of the one-way ANOVA cannot detect the possible interaction between two explanatory categories.
Table 1 shows a data of bonding strength of four types of resin (A, B, C and D) on the teeth surface with a simultaneous use of two different curing light sources (Halogen, LED). The highest overall bonding strength is found on resin D followed by resin C and resin B showing insignificant differences (see the superscript a, b, and c). Considering cases using the 'Halogen,' resin D is the strongest among four resin types, while resin C shows the highest value when the 'LED' was used. This explicitly shows that the effects of different resin types are not following a similar trend according to different levels of curing methods, 'Halogen' or 'LED'. Figure 1a shows that trend of (descriptive) mean bonding strengths for resin types are changing according to the levels of curing methods.
Interaction model or main effect (no-interaction) model?
When we have a quantitative continuous outcome and two categorical explanatory variables, we may consider two kinds of relationship between two categorical variables, which could be typically seen in the Figures 1b and 1c. The Figure 1c shows that the relative effect of each level in the material category doesn't change with different levels of curing methods, which means an additive relationship between the two categorical variables, i.e. the second categorical variable takes a role of adding a uniform effect on the relationship between the outcome and the first categorical variable. In this relationship we can distinguish effect of one factor from that of the other factor. This type of model is called a main effect model or no-interaction model. However, Figure 1b shows that the effect of material depends on the levels of the curing methods and we cannot tell effect of one factor separately, i.e. which light source does produce stronger bonding? This is called an interaction model because an interaction relationship is included. We may see that the interaction model could easily reproduce the actual relationship among descriptive means, as seen in Figure 1a. Therefore generally the first step in application of the two-way ANOVA is fitting the interaction model, specified as the "Full factorial model" (Part A, d-1, below) and test the significance of the interaction term. The resulting ANOVA table of two-way ANOVA interaction model is shown in Table 2 and g-1 (below) and we could find the interaction term (Light*Resin) is statistically significant at an alpha level of 0.05 (p < 0.001). As an effect of a level of one variable depends on levels of the other variable, we cannot separate the effects of two variables, neither independent effect of resin types nor independent effect of curing light. The levels of two categorical variables should combined into a total of eight categories (2 levels of Light * 4 levels of Resin) and the post-hoc multiple comparisons may be implemented among the eight categories as if they consist of one (combined) factor (shown in h-1①; variable name = 'light_mat'). Table 3 provides the complete report of analyses results from the interaction model as well as post-hoc multiple comparisons. The plot in Figure 1 may be displayed by requesting plots (e, below). The underlying assumptions of the two-way ANOVA model are the same with those of the one-way ANOVA, normal distribution of outcomes and equal variances. The assumption of normality should be checked in an exploratory procedure and the assumption of equal variances may be tested as the homogeneity test for the null hypothesis of equal variances for all groups, as shown in the procedure f, below.
On the other hand, if we have an insignificant interaction term, different from the results above, we consider a main effect (no-interaction) model as shown in Part B below, which may be actually incorrect in modeling this data. Table 4 shows the comprehensive results of the analyses based on the main effect model, although the model is actually inadequate because it doesn't fit the data well. The superscripts represent statistical differences among levels of Resin types only because the effect of Light was insignificant (p = 0.412). You may add superscripts of upper cases to represent statistical differences in the levels of the Light variable if the Light is significant.
The two-way ANOVA with interaction term using the SPSS statistical package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) as following procedures:
- 1. Daniel WW. Biostatistics - Basic concepts and methodology for the health sciences. 9th ed. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd; 2010. p. 334-368.
REFERENCES
Figure 1
Graphs for bonding strength by resin materials (A, B, C, and D) displayed as separated lines of different curing light sources (Halogen & LED): (a) Descriptive means; (b) Estimated means by the model with the interaction term; (c) Estimated means by the model without the interaction term between two factors.
Table 1
Measurements of bonding strength (Mpa) according to four different types of resin and two curing methods
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
By the independent t-test: p-value (Halogen vs. LED) = 0.498.
By the One-way ANOVA (A vs. B vs. C vs. D): p-value (all methods) < 0.001, p-value (only Halogen) < 0.001, p-value (only LED) = 0.025.
Table 2
The ANOVA table from the two-way ANOVA considering two factors with the interaction term (correct)
Table 3
Comparative mean bonding strength under the two-way ANOVA model with the interaction model (correct, g-1)
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
p-value (model) < 0.001; p-value (light) = 0.297; p-value (resin) < 0.001; p-value (resin*light) < 0.001; R-square = 0.61.
Table 4
Comparative mean bonding strength under the two-way ANOVA using the main effect model (no-interaction model, incorrect†, g-2)
†This table simply shows how to report results of the main effect model, only for the purpose of illustration. Actually the Table 3 displays the correct results which reflect given data well.
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
p-value (model) < 0.001; R-square = 0.35.
Tables & Figures
REFERENCES
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by 
- Dysregulation of mRNA expression by hsa-miR-186 overexpression in arsenic-induced skin carcinogenesis
Mayukh Banerjee, Angeliki Lykoudi, Jae Y. Hwang, Jianmin Pan, Shesh N. Rai, Juw W. Park, J. Christopher States
Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology.2025; 495: 117209. CrossRef - Sustainable synthesis of MOF for COVID-19 detection using a 23 factorial design
Aya Elgazar, Rana Sabouni, Mehdi Ghommem, Amin F. Majdalawieh
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects.2025; 705: 135616. CrossRef - Feasible Preparation of Naphthalimide-Functionalized Zeolitic Imidazolate Framework-8 for Control, and Fluorescence Detection of Virus: Optimization of Model Study
Hind A. Al-Shwaiman, Rustem R. Zairov, Asad Syed, Manjula Subramaniam, Meenakshi Verma, Baadal Jushi Janani, Ramadan Fallah Amer
Journal of Fluorescence.2024;[Epub] CrossRef - The influence of vibratory massage after physical exertion on selected psychological processes
Krzysztof Wrześniewski, Tomasz Pałka, Jan Blecharz
Frontiers in Psychology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef - Mindfulness's moderating role applied on online SEL education
Chun-Heng Ho, Hang-qin Zhang, Juan Li, An'an Liu
Frontiers in Psychology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef - Protecting the piglet gut microbiota against ETEC-mediated post-weaning diarrhoea using specific binding proteins
Timothy Patrick Jenkins, Norbert Ács, Emma Wenzel Arendrup, Abbie Swift, Ágnes Duzs, Ioanna Chatzigiannidou, Michael Pichler, Tiia Kittilä, Laura Peachey, Lone Gram, Nuria Canibe, Andreas Hougaard Laustsen, Susanne Brix, Sandra Wingaard Thrane
npj Biofilms and Microbiomes.2024;[Epub] CrossRef - Environmental Degradation Study of Polypropylene Films Incorporating Pro-Oxidants: Comprehensive Analysis and Ecotoxicological Assessment
Samira Kerouani, Jouayria Saliha Keraghel, Hichem Tahraoui, Jie Zhang, Abdeltif Amrane
Journal of Macromolecular Science, Part B.2024; : 1. CrossRef - Comprehensive metabolic profiling of Thymus canoviridis (endemic) and Thymus pubescens var. pubescens using UPLC-MS/MS and evaluation of their antioxidant activities, enzyme inhibition abilities, and molecular docking studies
Leyla Güven, Hasan Can, Adem Ertürk, Fatma Demirkaya Miloğlu, Mehmet Koca, Fatmanur İnce, İlhami Gülçin
South African Journal of Botany.2024; 165: 478. CrossRef - The Efficacy of a Phytogenic Blend Against Induced Heat Stress in Broilers
Bhagyalaxmi Junnuru, Hritika Merchant, Pratik Barsinge, Amit Kini, Dayaram Suryawansh
International Journal of Poultry Science.2024; 23(1): 133. CrossRef - Influence of Polycaprolactone Concentration and Solvent Type on the Dimensions and Morphology of Electrosprayed Particles
Laura Alberto, Lohitha Kalluri, Jing Qu, Yongfeng Zhao, Yuanyuan Duan
Materials.2023; 16(5): 2122. CrossRef - Analyzing the impact of indoor environmental quality on physiological responses and work performance: Implications for IEQ control strategies
Donggeun Oh, Jimin Kim, Handon Kim, Hyounseung Jang, Taehoon Hong, Jongbaek An
Building and Environment.2023; 244: 110845. CrossRef - Diffusion tensor imaging for the differential diagnosis of Parkinsonism by machine learning
Chih-Chien Tsai, Yao-Liang Chen, Chin-Song Lu, Jur-Shan Cheng, Yi-Hsin Weng, Sung-Han Lin, Yi-Ming Wu, Jiun-Jie Wang
Biomedical Journal.2023; 46(3): 100541. CrossRef - 스포츠 OTT 콘텐츠 유형에 따른 콘텐츠 속성이 소비자 만족, 구전의도 및 지속이용의도에 미치는 영향: 스포츠 관여도의 조절효과
유나 김, 청우 나, 준성 이
The Korean Journal of Physical Education.2023; 62(1): 291. CrossRef - Information provision measures for voice agent product recommendations— The effect of process explanations and process visualizations on fairness perceptions
Helena Weith, Christian Matt
Electronic Markets.2023;[Epub] CrossRef - Usability of Smart Home Thermostat to Evaluate the Impact of Weekdays and Seasons on Sleep Patterns and Indoor Stay: Observational Study
Niloofar Jalali, Kirti Sundar Sahu, Arlene Oetomo, Plinio Pelegrini Morita
JMIR mHealth and uHealth.2022; 10(4): e28811. CrossRef - Genetic architecture of natural variation of cardiac performance from flies to humans
Saswati Saha, Lionel Spinelli, Jaime A Castro Mondragon, Anaïs Kervadec, Michaela Lynott, Laurent Kremmer, Laurence Roder, Sallouha Krifa, Magali Torres, Christine Brun, Georg Vogler, Rolf Bodmer, Alexandre R Colas, Karen Ocorr, Laurent Perrin
eLife.2022;[Epub] CrossRef - Quantitative analysis of multi-components by single-marker: An effective method for the chemical characterization of wood vinegar
Liu Mengfan, Yao Jingjing, Zhang Chengliang, Hao Runqin, Zhang Zhongguo, Cao Wenbo
Industrial Crops and Products.2022; 182: 114862. CrossRef - Cardioprotective effects of chloroquine pretreatment on ischemic and reperfusion injury via activation of ERK1/2 in isolated rat hearts
Ryota Murase, Yasushige Shingu, Satoru Wakasa
Molecular Biology Reports.2022; 49(10): 9429. CrossRef - Dynamical Downscaling of Near‐Term (2026–2035) Climate Variability and Change for the Main Hawaiian Islands
K. M. Fandrich, O. Elison Timm, C. Zhang, T. W. Giambelluca
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.2022;[Epub] CrossRef - A Narrative Review on Intermittent Fasting as an Approachable Measure for Weight Reduction and Obesity Management
Raghav Janaswamy , Pallavi Yelne
Cureus.2022;[Epub] CrossRef - Enhanced pigment content estimation using the Gauss-peak spectra method with thin-layer chromatography for a novel source of natural colorants
Natalia Paulina Twardowska, Christophe Hano
PLOS ONE.2021; 16(5): e0251491. CrossRef - Long Non-Coding RNA ANRIL as a Potential Biomarker of Chemosensitivity and Clinical Outcomes in Osteosarcoma
Adam M. Lee, Asmaa Ferdjallah, Elise Moore, Daniel C. Kim, Aritro Nath, Emily Greengard, R. Stephanie Huang
International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2021; 22(20): 11168. CrossRef - Effects of the artificial reef and flow field environment on the habitat selection behavior of Sebastes schlegelii juveniles
Jiajia Li, Jiao Li, Pihai Gong, Changtao Guan
Applied Animal Behaviour Science.2021; 245: 105492. CrossRef - Modelling and optimizing performance parameters in the wire-electro discharge machining of Al5083/B4C composite by multi-objective response surface methodology
Ram Singh, Syed Abou Iltaf Hussain, Aruntapan Dash, Ram Naresh Rai
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering.2020;[Epub] CrossRef - Prediction and Optimization of Parameters for the Al5083/ B4C Composite Wear Rate
Ram Singh, Malik Shadab, Rabisankar Debnath, Ram Naresh Rai
Current Nanoscience.2020; 16(4): 584. CrossRef - Vanadium and Oxidative Stress Markers - In Vivo Model: A Review
Agnieszka Ścibior, Joanna Kurus
Current Medicinal Chemistry.2019; 26(29): 5456. CrossRef - Analysis of Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms in Human Voltage-Gated Ion Channels
Katerina C. Nastou, Michail A. Batskinis, Zoi I. Litou, Stavros J. Hamodrakas, Vassiliki A. Iconomidou
Journal of Proteome Research.2019; 18(5): 2310. CrossRef - Two-step pyrolysis characteristic of cellulose: effects of pyrolysis temperature and residence time
Liqiang Zhang, Shanshan Li, Lingrui Huang, Xifeng Zhu
Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects.2019; 41(20): 2481. CrossRef - Evaluation of parameters affecting adhesive strength of high build epoxy coatings on textured and plasma treated metallic substrates
Satheesan Bobby, Abdul Samad Mohammed
Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology.2018; 32(4): 407. CrossRef - Os efeitos da lidocaína e do sulfato de magnésio na atenuação da resposta hemodinâmica à intubação orotraqueal: estudo unicêntrico, prospectivo, duplamente encoberto e aleatorizado
Fabiano Timbó Barbosa
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology.2017; 67(6): 666. CrossRef - Public Health Delivery Systems and the Provision of Maternal and Child Health Preventive Services
Sharla Smith A
MOJ Public Health.2017;[Epub] CrossRef - Effects of lidocaine and magnesium sulfate in attenuating hemodynamic response to orotracheal intubation: a single-center, prospective, double blind, randomized study
Fabiano Timbó Barbosa
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English Edition).2017; 67(6): 666. CrossRef - The effect of human blood on the setting and surface micro-hardness of calcium silicate cements
Minju Song, Wonyoung Yue, Soyeon Kim, Wooksung Kim, Yaelim Kim, Jeong-Woong Kim, Euiseong Kim
Clinical Oral Investigations.2016; 20(8): 1997. CrossRef
ePub Link
Cite
XML DownloadStatistical notes for clinical researchers: Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)-exploring possible interaction between factors
Figure 1 Graphs for bonding strength by resin materials (A, B, C, and D) displayed as separated lines of different curing light sources (Halogen & LED): (a) Descriptive means; (b) Estimated means by the model with the interaction term; (c) Estimated means by the model without the interaction term between two factors.
Figure 1
Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)-exploring possible interaction between factors
Measurements of bonding strength (Mpa) according to four different types of resin and two curing methods
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
By the independent t-test: p-value (Halogen vs. LED) = 0.498.
By the One-way ANOVA (A vs. B vs. C vs. D): p-value (all methods) < 0.001, p-value (only Halogen) < 0.001, p-value (only LED) = 0.025.
The ANOVA table from the two-way ANOVA considering two factors with the interaction term (correct)
Comparative mean bonding strength under the two-way ANOVA model with the interaction model (correct, g-1)
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
p-value (model) < 0.001; p-value (light) = 0.297; p-value (resin) < 0.001; p-value (resin*light) < 0.001; R-square = 0.61.
Comparative mean bonding strength under the two-way ANOVA using the main effect model (no-interaction model, incorrect†, g-2)
†This table simply shows how to report results of the main effect model, only for the purpose of illustration. Actually the
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
p-value (model) < 0.001; R-square = 0.35.
Table 1 Measurements of bonding strength (Mpa) according to four different types of resin and two curing methods
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05. By the independent By the One-way ANOVA (A vs. B vs. C vs. D):
Table 2 The ANOVA table from the two-way ANOVA considering two factors with the interaction term (correct)
Table 3 Comparative mean bonding strength under the two-way ANOVA model with the interaction model (correct, g-1)
*Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
Table 4 Comparative mean bonding strength under the two-way ANOVA using the main effect model (no-interaction model, incorrect†, g-2)
†This table simply shows how to report results of the main effect model, only for the purpose of illustration. Actually the *Different alphabets mean significantly different values at a type one error rate of 0.05.
