A cautionary note on the use of the Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) in classification designs with and without within-subject factors

• Main Authors: Bruce A Schneider, Meital eAvivi-Reich, Mindaugas eMozuraitis
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-04-01
• Series: Frontiers in Psychology
• Subjects: experimental design; covariance analysis; statistical power; Classification Designs; Within-Subject Designs; type 1 errors
• Online Access: http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00474/full

A number of statistical textbooks recommend using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to control for the effects of extraneous factors that might influence the dependent measure of interest. However, it is not generally recognized that serious problems of interpretation can arise when the design contains comparisons of participants sampled from different populations (classification designs). Designs that include a comparison of younger and older adults, or a comparison of musicians and non-musicians are examples of classification designs. In such cases, estimates of differences among groups can be contaminated by differences in the covariate population means across groups. A second problem of interpretation will arise if the experimenter fails to center the covariate measures (subtracting the mean covariate score from each covariate score) whenever the design contains within-subject factors. Unless the covariate measures on the participants are centered, estimates of within-subject factors are distorted, and significant increases in Type I error rates, and/or losses in power can occur when evaluating the effects of within-subject factors. This paper: 1) alerts potential users of ANCOVA of the need to center the covariate measures when the design contains within-subject factors, and 2) indicates how they can avoid biases when one cannot assume that the expected value of the covariate measure is the same for all of the groups in a classification design.