结果提示组间文盲率存在区别,到底是哪个地区之间存在统计学意义呢?
我们这里引用wmc函数
> source("http://www.statmethods.net/RiA/wmc.txt") > wmc(statas$Illiteracy~statas$state.region,data=statas,method="holm")
Deive Statistics West North Central Northeast Southn 13.00000 12.00000 9.00000 16.00000median 0.60000 0.70000 1.10000 1.75000mad 0.14826 0.14826 0.29652 0.59304Multiple Comparisons (Wilcoxon Rank Sum Tests)Probability Adjustment = holm Group.1 Group.2 W p 1 West North Central 88.0 8.665618e-01 2 West Northeast 46.5 8.665618e-01 3 West South 39.0 1.788186e-02 *4 North Central Northeast 20.5 5.359707e-02 .5 North Central South 2.0 8.051509e-05 ***6 Northeast South 18.0 1.187644e-02 *---Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
我们调用wmc函数对三组之间进行了比较,利用“holm”函数对p值进行校正,结果包括两个部分,第一部分是描述性统计分析,第二部分就是组组之间进行比较,结果提示南方地区与其他地区文盲率存在统计学意义。
> with(statas,by(statas$Illiteracy,statas$state.region,IQR))
statas$state.region: Northeast[1] 0.4
statas$state.region: South[1] 0.75
statas$state.region: North Central[1] 0.2
statas$state.region: West[1] 0.9 > with(statas,by(statas$Illiteracy,statas$state.region,median))
statas$state.region: Northeast[1] 1.1
statas$state.region: South[1] 1.75
statas$state.region: North Central[1] 0.7
statas$state.region: West[1] 0.6