How To Read Standard Error Bars
Contents |
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 two contrasting examples. What can you conclude when standard error bars do overlapping error bars not overlap? When standard error (SE) bars do not overlap, you cannot be sure that standard error bars excel the difference between two means is statistically significant. Even though the error bars do not overlap in experiment 1, the difference is not
How To Calculate Error Bars
statistically significant (P=0.09 by unpaired t test). This is also true when you 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
Error Bars Standard Deviation Or Standard Error
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 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 large error bars 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, observing whether SD error bars overlap or not tells you nothing about whether the difference is, or is not, statistically significant. What if the groups were matched and analyzed with a paired t test? All the comments above assume you are performing an unpaired t test. When you analyze matched data with a paired t test, it doesn't matter how much scatter each group has -- what matters is the consistency of the changes or differences.
Health Search databasePMCAll DatabasesAssemblyBioProjectBioSampleBioSystemsBooksClinVarCloneConserved DomainsdbGaPdbVarESTGeneGenomeGEO DataSetsGEO ProfilesGSSGTRHomoloGeneMedGenMeSHNCBI Web SiteNLM CatalogNucleotideOMIMPMCPopSetProbeProteinProtein ClustersPubChem BioAssayPubChem CompoundPubChem SubstancePubMedPubMed
How To Draw Error Bars
HealthSNPSparcleSRAStructureTaxonomyToolKitToolKitAllToolKitBookToolKitBookghUniGeneSearch termSearch Advanced Journal list Help Journal ListJ Cell Biolv.177(1); sem error bars 2007 Apr 9PMC2064100 J Cell Biol. 2007 Apr 9; 177(1): 7–11. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200611141PMCID: PMC2064100FeaturesError how to make error bars bars in experimental biologyGeoff Cumming,1 Fiona Fidler,1 and David L. Vaux21School of Psychological Science and 2Department of Biochemistry, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, https://egret.psychol.cam.ac.uk/statistics/local_copies_of_sources_Cardinal_and_Aitken_ANOVA/errorbars.htm Australia 3086Correspondence may also be addressed to Geoff Cumming (ua.ude.ebortal@gnimmuc.g) or Fiona Fidler (ua.ude.ebortal@reldif.f).Author information ► Copyright and License information ►Copyright © 2007, The Rockefeller University PressThis article has been cited by other articles in PMC.AbstractError bars commonly appear in figures in publications, but experimental biologists https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2064100/ are often unsure how they should be used and interpreted. In this article we illustrate some basic features of error bars and explain how they can help communicate data and assist correct interpretation. Error bars may show confidence intervals, standard errors, standard deviations, or other quantities. Different types of error bars give quite different information, and so figure legends must make clear what error bars represent. We suggest eight simple rules to assist with effective use and interpretation of error bars.What are error bars for?Journals that publish science—knowledge gained through repeated observation or experiment—don't just present new conclusions, they also present evidence so readers can verify that the authors' reasoning is correct. Figures with error bars can, if used properly (1–6), give information describing the data (descriptive statistics), or information about what conclusions, or inferences, are justified (i
CatservEvolutionBlogGreg Laden's BlogLife LinesPage 3.14PharyngulaRespectful InsolenceSignificant Figures by Peter GleickStarts With A BangStoatThe Pump HandleThe Weizmann http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2008/07/31/most-researchers-dont-understa-1/ WaveUncertain PrinciplesUSA Science and Engineering Festival: The BlogWorld's http://mathbench.umd.edu/modules/prob-stat_bargraph/page08.htm Fair2010 World Science Festival BlogA Blog Around The ClockAdventures in Ethics and ScienceA Good PoopAll of My Faults Are Stress RelatedAngry ToxicologistApplied StatisticsArt of Science LearningA Vote For ScienceBasic Concepts in SciencebioephemeraBlogging the error bars OriginBrookhaven Bits & BytesBuilt on FactsChaotic UtopiaChristina's LIS RantClass MCognitive DailyCommon KnowledgeCulture DishDean's CornerDeep Sea NewsDeveloping IntelligenceDispatches from the Creation WarsDot PhysicsDr. Joan Bushwell's Chimpanzee RefugeEffect MeasureEruptionsevolgenEvolution for EveryoneEvolving ThoughtsFraming ScienceGalactic InteractionsGene ExpressionGenetic FutureGood Math, Bad MathGreen GabbroGuilty PlanetIntegrity of ScienceIntel ISEFLaelapsLife standard error bars at the SETI InstituteLive from ESOF 2014Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted)Mike the Mad BiologistMixing MemoryMolecule of the DayMyrmecosNeuron CultureNeuronticNeurophilosophyNeurotopiaNot Exactly Rocket ScienceObesity PanaceaObservations of a NerdOf Two MindsOmni BrainOn Becoming a Domestic and Laboratory GoddessOscillatorPhoto SynthesisPure PedantryRetrospectacle: A Neuroscience BlogRevolutionary Minds Think TankScience + SocietyScience After SunclipseScience is CultureScienceOnline 2010: The BlogSciencePunkScience To LifeSciencewomenSeed/MoMA SalonSee Jane ComputeShifting BaselinesSignoutSpeakeasy ScienceSpeaking Science 2.0Stranger FruitSuperbugTerra SigillataTetrapod ZoologyThe Blogger SAT ChallengeThe Book of TrogoolThe Cheerful OncologistThe Corpus CallosumThe Examining Room of Dr. CharlesThe Frontal CortexThe IntersectionThe Island of DoubtThe LoomThe Primate DiariesThe Quantum PontiffThe Questionable AuthorityThe Rightful Place ProjectThe ScienceBlogs Book ClubThe Scientific ActivistThe Scientific IndianThe Thoughtful AnimalThe Voltage GateThoughts from KansasThus Spake ZuskaTomorrow's TableTranscription and TranslationUniverseWalt at RandomWe BeastiesWhite Coat UndergroundZooillogix Search National Geog
and found 6: Error bars 7: Practice with error bars 8: And another way: the standard error 9: The same graph both ways 10: Review map| <| >| home Another way to add info: the standard error Graphs using standard deviation (SD) tell you what a big population of fish would look like -- whether their sizes would be all uniform, or somewhat raggedy, or totally raggedy. Sometimes, though, you don't really care what a population looks like, you just want to know, did a treatment (like Fish2Whale instead of other competing brands) make a difference on average? In that case you measure a bunch of fish because you're trying to get a really good estimate of the average effect, despite whatever raggediness might be present in the populations. Let's say your company decides to go all out to prove that Fish2Whale really is better than the competition. They convert a supply closet into an acquarium, hatch 400 fish, and tell you to do a HUGE experiment. The whole idea of the HUGE experiment is to get a really accurate measurement of the effect of Fish2Whale, despite the natural differences such as temperature, light, initial size of fish, solar flares, and ESP phenomena. The return on their investment? Really small error bars. But how do you get small error bars? Just using 400 fish WON'T give you a smaller SD. A huge population will be just as "ragged" as a small population. Instead, you need to use a quantity called the "standard error", or SE, which is the same as the standard deviation DIVIDED BY the square root of the sample size. Since you fed 100 fish with Fish2Whale, you get to divide the standard deviation of each result by 10 (i.e., the square root of 100). Likewise with each of the other 3 brands. So your reward for all that work is that your error bars are much smaller: Why should you care about small error bars? Well, as a rule of thumb, if the SE error bars for the 2 treatments do not overlap, then you have shown that the treatment