Abstract
The efficiency of a research design may be measured in terms of the degree to which knowledge is enhanced within given resource constraints. Thus, two different types of research design, even though they contain the same number of expected observations, may differ considerably in the amount of information provided. An example is the number N of 32 observations obtained with an analysis of variance witheither 2 factors, 2 levels per factor and a replication of 8or 4 factors, 4 levels per factor and a replication of 2. We analyze and compare the relative efficiencies of regression and variance analysis models and their implications to research strategy development. Three major considerations are evaluated: (1) short versus long time horizon (interval until effects of a decision are realized), (2) small versus large cost of erroneous rejection of the Null Hypothesis and (3) gross versus refined stage of development of the research study. A set of general guidelines towards improved designs is developed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackoff, R. L., Gupta, S. K. and Minas, J. S. 1962. Scientific Method. New York: Wiley.
Bradley, J. V. 1964. “Studies in Research Methodology VI: The Central Limit Effect for a Variety of Populations and Robustness of z, t and F.” Technical Report AMRL-TR. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 64–123.
Enrick, N. L. 1960. “Variations Flow Analysis.” Technometrics, Vol. 2, No. 3 (August) 373–86.
Fisher, R. A. 1950. Statistical methods for Research Workers. New York: Hafner, Eleventh edition.
Geary, R. C. and Leser, C. E. V. 1968. “Significance Tests in Multiple Regression.” The American Statistician, Vol. 22, No. 1 (February) 20–1.
Greene, B. F. and Tukey, J. W. 1960. “Complex Analyses of Variance: General Problems.” Psychometrika, Vol. 25, No. 2 (June) 127–52.
Hummel, Thomas J. and Sligo, Joseph R. 1971. “Empirical Comparisons of Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Variance Procedures.” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 76, No. 1 (July) 49–57.
Labovitz, Sanford. 1968. “Criteria for Selecting a Significance Level: A Note on the Sacredness of 0.05.” The American Sociologist, Vol. 3, No. 3 (August) 220–22.
Lehman, E. L. 1958. “Significance Level and Power.” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, Vol. 29, 1167–176.
Myers, B. L. and Enrick, N. L. 1970. Statistical Functions. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press.
Pearson, E. S. and Hartley, H. O. 1958. Biometrika Tables for Statisticians, Vol. 1. London: Cambridge University Press.
Scheffé, H. 1959. Analysis of Variance. New York: Wiley.
Suits, Daniel B. 1957. “Use of Dummy Variables in Regression Equations.” American Statistical Association Journal, Vol. 52, No. 280 (December) 548–51.
Vaughan, Graham M. and Corballis, Michael C. 1969. “Beyond Tests of Significance: Estimating Strength of Effects in Selected Anova Designs.” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 72, No. 3 (September) 204–13.
Wolfowitz, J. 1967. “Remarks on the Theory of Testing Hypotheses.” The New York Statistician, Vol. 18, No. 7 (March) 1–2.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Myers, B.L., Enrick, N.L. & Melcher, A.J. Strategy in research design and hypothesis testing. JAMS 2, 249–261 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02729518
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02729518