Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,166

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Mann-Whitney U: A Test for Assessing Whether Two Independent Samples Come from the Same Distribution

Open access
Nachar, Nadim·2008·Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology
DOI 10.20982/tqmp.04.1.p013
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

It is often difficult, particularly when conducting research in psychology, to have access to large normally distributed samples.Fortunately, there are statistical tests to compare two independent groups that do not require large normally distributed samples.The Mann-Whitney U is one of these tests.In the following work, a summary of this test is presented.The explanation of the logic underlying this test and its application are presented.Moreover, the forces and weaknesses of the Mann-Whitney U are mentioned.One major limit of the Mann-Whitney U is that the type I error or alpha (α) is amplified in a situation of heteroscedasticity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.20982/tqmp.04.1.p013

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. American Psychological Association, 1998, Special section: Empirically supported psychological therapies, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 1
  2. Gibbons, J. D., 1991, Comparisons of the Mann-Whitney, Student's t, and alternate t tests for means of normal distributions, Journal of Experimental Education, 59, 258, 10.1080/00220973.1991.10806565 · DOI
  3. Kasuya, E., 2001, Mann-Whitney U test when variances are unequal, Animal Behavior, 61, 1247, 10.1006/anbe.2001.1691 · DOI
  4. Kazdin, A. E., 2003, Methodological Issues and Strategies in Clinical Research (3rd edition)
  5. Kraemer, H. C., 1981, Coping strategies in psychiatric clinical research, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 309, 10.1037/0022-006X.49.3.309 · DOI
  6. Kazdin, A. E., 1986, Comparative outcome studies in psychotherapy: Methodological issues and strategies, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 95, 10.1037/0022-006X.54.1.95 · DOI
  7. Landers, J., 1981, Quantification in History, Topic 4 : Hypothesis Testing II-Differing Central Tendency
  8. Mann, H. B., 1947, On a test of whether one of 2 random variables is stochastically larger than the other, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18, 50, 10.1214/aoms/1177730491 · DOI · Paper page
  9. British Psychological Society Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, 2001, Treatment Choice in Psychological Therapies and Counselling: Evidence Based Clinical Practice Guideline
  10. Robert, M. et al., 1988, Fondements et \'etapes de la recherche scientifique en psychologie
  11. Robert, C. P. and Casella, G., 2004, Monte Carlo Statistical Methods, second edition, 10.1007/978-1-4757-4145-2 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Siegel, S. and Castellan, N. J. Jr, 1988, Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences
  13. Shapiro, D. A., 1983, Comparative therapy outcome research: Methodological implications of meta-analysis, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 42, 10.1037/0022-006X.51.1.42 · DOI
  14. Zimmerman, D. W., 1985, Power functions of the t test and Mann-Whitney U test under violation of parametric assumptions, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 467, 10.2466/pms.1985.61.2.467 · DOI
  15. Zimmerman, D. W., 1987, Comparative power of Student t test and Mann-Whitney U test for unequal sample sizes and variances, Journal of Experimental Education, 55, 171, 10.1080/00220973.1987.10806451 · DOI

Cited by

See all 1,166

Metadata

Authors
Nachar, N.
Venue
Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology
Publisher
The Quantitative Methods for Psychology
Published
2008-03-01
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
13-20
ISSN
1913-4126 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.20982/tqmp.04.1.p013
OpenAlex
W2386192529
Cited by
1,166
References
2
FWCI
1.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.