THE RANDOMIZED COMPLETE BLOCK DESIGN

Example

Suppose we want to test whether four different laboratories produce the same result on analyzing a given sample. As the result may be affected by the sample, each sample is measured by the four laboratories. Results are
Sample Laboratory 1 2 3 4 1 9.3 9.4 9.2 9.7 2 9.4 9.3 9.4 9.6 3 9.6 9.8 9.5 10 4 10 9.9 9.7 10.2

Data entry in R

Sample Laboratory 1 2 3 4 1 9.3 9.4 9.2 9.7 2 9.4 9.3 9.4 9.6 3 9.6 9.8 9.5 10 4 10 9.9 9.7 10.2

Each row represents a result of one lab in one sample. If replicate exists, then we will have more that one row with the same lab and sample (which is not the case here).

Example

Each sample contains uncontrolled effects that we are interested in separate from the main effect, i.e. the results of each laboratory. Thus, the samples are BLOCKS and their variability will be subtracted from the error.

Block may differ substantially one from the other. They do not represent random samples of a given population.

This is a randomized complete block design because each sample is tested by all the laboratories.

Data analysis
Analysis with block effect

Analysis without block effect

The importance of randomization

Four different brands of tires: A,B,C,D Do they exihbit the same tread loss after 20000 miles of driving? As the tires muts be tried in different cars, we decide to use four sets of tires in the same car. The experimental design is indicated in the table 1. This is completely confounded design. A complete random design is indicated in 2

Table 1. Cars
1 A A A A 2 B B B B 3 C C C C 4 D D D D

Table 2. Cars 1 C A D D 2 A A B C 3 D C B B 4 A D B C

Completely randomized
Table 2. Cars 1 C A D D

Brands 4 A D B C A 171 142 132 134 B 142 143 133 84 C 121 122 103 94 D 131 111 113 94

2 A A B C

3 D C B B

Brand A is never used on car 3 Brand B is never used on car 1 Any variation within Brand A may reflect variation between cars 1,2 and 4.

Data entry

Brands A 171 142 132 B 142 143 133 C 121 122 103 D 131 111 113

134

84

94

94

ANOVA

Results are not significative. There are no differences due to the brand of the tire. The error term may reflect a variability between cars. The completely randomized design averaged out the car effects, but it did not elimiante the variance among cars.

Completely randomized block design

Table 2. Cars 1 B C A D 2 D C B A 3 A B D C 4 C D B A CAR 1 2 3 4 A 17 14 13 13 Brands B 14 14 13 8 C 12 12 10 9 D 13 11 11 9

The four brands are tested in each car randomly. Cars are BLOCKS in this design. We analyze this as a two-way ANOVA Note that the numbers are the same, but know they come from a different design.

Data entry

Brands A CAR 1 2 3 4 17 14 13 13 B 14 14 13 8 C 12 12 10 9 D 13 11 11 9

ANOVA

The effect of the car is significative. As we substract the car variability from the error term, the estimated error variance has decreased. The four brands show difference in tread loss (p=0.007).

Comparisons between brands

Brand A shows a higher tread loss than C and D, but not B.

THE LATIN SQUARE DESIGN

The latin square design

This is an appropriate design when we want to block two different sources of variation. The two block adds uncontrolled noise to the data and may confound the main effect. For instance, consider that five procedures (A,B,C,D,E) are to be tested by five operators in five equivalent samples. Since both samples and operators introduce some variability, we use a latin square design
Samples 1 2 3 4 5 1 A B C D E 2 B C D E A Operators 3 C D E A B 4 D E A B C 5 E A B C D

Data entry
Samples 1 2 3 4 5 1 A (24) B (17) C (18) D (26) E (22) 2 B (20) C (24) D (38) E (31) A (30) Operators 3 C (19) D (30) E (26) A (26) B (20) 4 D (24) E (27) A (27) B (23) C (29) 5 E (24) A (36) B (21) C (22) D (31)

The latin square design

Samples 1 2 3 4 5 1 A (24) B (17) C (18) D (26) E (22) 2 B (20) C (24) D (38) E (31) A (30) Operators 3 C (19) D (30) E (26) A (26) B (20) 4 D (24) E (27) A (27) B (23) C (29) 5 E (24) A (36) B (21) C (22) D (31)

The latin square design