[R] MANOVA extension of paired t-test?

[Peter Dalgaard BSA]

Prof Brian Ripley <ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk> writes:

> On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Stewart Schultz wrote:
> 
> > What is the original manova() statement in such a case?  In other words,
> > one has several variables, and the desire is to test whether the mean of
> > each is zero (the "treatment" has been subsumed by the definition of the
> > variable, which is a before-after difference).  manova(Y~rep(0,nrow(Y))) is
> > the intuitive choice, but doesn't work.
> 
> manova(Y ~ 1) specifies an overall mean, if that is what you want.

There appears to be several ways not to do that...

This works:

> Y <- cbind(rnorm(10),rnorm(10))
> summary(manova(Y~1),intercept=T) 
            Df Pillai approx F num Df den Df Pr(>F)
(Intercept)  1 0.2090   1.0569      2      8 0.3915
Residuals    9                                     


-- 
   O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
  c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
 (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk)             FAX: (+45) 35327907
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._