Error Bars Too Big
Contents |
Graphpad.com FAQs Find ANY word Find ALL words Find EXACT phrase Is it better to plot graphs with SD or SEM error bars? (Answer: Neither) FAQ# 201 Last Modified 1-January-2009 There are better alternatives to graphing the mean with SD or SEM. If you want to show the large error bars variation in your data: If each value represents a different individual, you probably want to show large error bars mean the variation among values. Even if each value represents a different lab experiment, it often makes sense to show the variation. With fewer than error bars in excel 100 or so values, create a scatter plot that shows every value. What better way to show the variation among values than to show every value? If your data set hasmore than 100 or so values, a scatter plot becomes
How To Calculate Error Bars
messy. Alternatives are to show a box-and-whiskers plot, a frequency distribution (histogram), or a cumulative frequency distribution. What about plotting mean and SD? The SD does quantify variability, so this is indeed one way to graph variability. But a SD is only one value, so is a pretty limited way to show variation. A graph showing mean and SD error bar is less informative than any of the other alternatives, but takes no less space and is no easier to error bars matlab interpret. I see no advantage to plotting a mean and SD rather than a column scatter graph, box-and-wiskers plot, or a frequency distribution. Of course, if you do decide to show SD error bars, be sure to say so in the figure legend so no one will think it is a SEM. If you want to show how precisely you have determined the mean: If your goal is to compare means with a t test or ANOVA, or to show how closely our data come to the predictions of a model, you may be more interested in showing how precisely the data define the mean than in showing the variability. In this case, the best approach is to plot the 95% confidence interval of the mean (or perhaps a 90% or 99% confidence interval). What about the standard error of the mean (SEM)? Graphing the mean with an SEM error bars is a commonly used method to show how well you know the mean, The only advantage of SEM error bars are that they are shorter,but SEM error bars are harder to interpret than a confidence interval. Whatever error bars you choose to show, be sure to state your choice. Noticing whether or not the error bars overlap tells you less than you might guess. If you want to create persuasive propaganda: If your goal is to emphasize small and unimportant differences in your data, show your
in a publication or presentation, you may be tempted to draw conclusions about the statistical significance of differences between group means by looking at whether the error bars overlap. Let's look at error bars in excel 2013 two contrasting examples. What can you conclude when standard error bars do
Error Bars In R
not overlap? When standard error (SE) bars do not overlap, you cannot be sure that the difference between two
How To Read Error Bars
means is statistically significant. Even though the error bars do not overlap in experiment 1, the difference is not statistically significant (P=0.09 by unpaired t test). This is also true when you http://www.graphpad.com/support/faqid/201/ compare proportions with a chi-square test. What can you conclude when standard error bars do overlap? No surprises here. When SE bars overlap, (as in experiment 2) you can be sure the difference between the two means is not statistically significant (P>0.05). What if you are comparing more than two groups? Post tests following one-way ANOVA account for multiple comparisons, so they yield higher https://egret.psychol.cam.ac.uk/statistics/local_copies_of_sources_Cardinal_and_Aitken_ANOVA/errorbars.htm P values than t tests comparing just two groups. So the same rules apply. If two SE error bars overlap, you can be sure that a post test comparing those two groups will find no statistical significance. However if two SE error bars do not overlap, you can't tell whether a post test will, or will not, find a statistically significant difference. What if the error bars do not represent the SEM? Error bars that represent the 95% confidence interval (CI) of a mean are wider than SE error bars -- about twice as wide with large sample sizes and even wider with small sample sizes. If 95% CI error bars do not overlap, you can be sure the difference is statistically significant (P < 0.05). However, the converse is not true--you may or may not have statistical significance when the 95% confidence intervals overlap. Some graphs and tables show the mean with the standard deviation (SD) rather than the SEM. The SD quantifies variability, but does not account for sample size. To assess statistical significance, you must take into account sample size as well as variability. Therefore, observ
average, there should be an indication of how much smear there is in the data. It makes a huge difference to your interpretation of the information, http://betterposters.blogspot.com/2012/01/error-bars.html particularly when glancing at the figure. For instance, I'm willing to bet most people looking at this... Would say, "Wow, the treatment is making a big difference compared to the control!" I'm likewise willing to bet most people looking at this (which plots the same averages)... Would say, "There's so much overlap in the data, there might not be any real difference between the control and the treatments." error bars The problem is that error bars can represent at least three different measurements (Cumming et al. 2007). Standard deviation Standard error Confidence interval Sadly, there is no convention for which of the three one should add to a graph. There is no graphical convention to distinguish these three values, either. Here's a nice example of how different these three measures look (Figure 4 from Cumming et al. 2007), error bars in and how they change with sample size: I often see graphs with no indication of which of those three things the error bars are showing! And the moral of the story is: Identify your error bars! Put in the Y axis or in the caption for the graph. Reference Cumming G, Fidler F, Vaux D 2007. Error bars in experimental biology The Journal of Cell Biology 177(1): 7-11. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200611141 A different problem with error bars is here. Posted by Zen Faulkes at 7:00 AM Labels: graphics 8 comments: Rafael Maia said... Thanks for posting on this very important, but often ignored, topic! A fundamental point is also that these measures of dispersion also represent very different information about the data and the estimation. While the standard deviation is a measure of variability of the data itself (how dispersed it is around its expected value), standard errors and CI refer to the variability or precision of the distribution of the statistic or estimate. That's why, in the figure you show, the SE and CI change with sample size but the SD doesn't: the SD is giving you information about the spread of the data, and the SE & CI are giving you informati