Interpreting 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
Overlapping Error Bars
standard error bars do not overlap? When standard error (SE) bars do not overlap, large error bars you cannot be sure that the difference between two means is statistically significant. Even though the error bars do not overlap in
Sem Error Bars
experiment 1, the difference is not 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 standard error bars excel 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 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 how to calculate error bars 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, 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 wi
Graphpad.com FAQs Find ANY word Find ALL words Find EXACT phrase What you can conclude when two error bars overlap (or don't)? FAQ# 1362 Last Modified 22-April-2010 It is tempting to look at whether two error bars overlap or not, and try to reach a conclusion about whether
Error Bars Standard Deviation Or Standard Error
the difference between means is statistically significant. Resist that temptation (Lanzante, 2005)! SD error bars SD how to draw error bars error bars quantify the scatter among the values. Looking at whether the error bars overlap lets you compare the difference between the mean with
What Do Small Error Bars Mean
the amount of scatter within the groups. But the t test also takes into account sample size. If the samples were larger with the same means and same standard deviations, the P value would be much smaller. If the samples https://egret.psychol.cam.ac.uk/statistics/local_copies_of_sources_Cardinal_and_Aitken_ANOVA/errorbars.htm were smaller with the same means and same standard deviations, the P value would be larger. When the difference between two means is statistically significant (P < 0.05), the two SD error bars may or may not overlap. Likewise, when the difference between two means is not statistically significant (P > 0.05), the two SD error bars may or may not overlap. Knowing whether SD error bars overlap or not does not let you conclude whether difference between the means is http://www.graphpad.com/support/faqid/1362/ statistically significant or not. SEM error bars SEM error bars quantify how precisely you know the mean, taking into account both the SD and sample size. Looking at whether the error bars overlap, therefore, lets you compare the difference between the mean with the precision of those means. This sounds promising. But in fact, you don’t learn much by looking at whether SEM error bars overlap. By taking into account sample size and considering how far apart two error bars are, Cumming (2007) came up with some rules for deciding when a difference is significant or not. But these rules are hard to remember and apply. Here is a simpler rule: If two SEM error bars do overlap, and the sample sizes are equal or nearly equal, then you know that the P value is (much) greater than 0.05, so the difference is not statistically significant. The opposite rule does not apply. If two SEM error bars do not overlap, the P value could be less than 0.05, or it could be greater than 0.05. If the sample sizes are very different, this rule of thumb does not always work. Confidence interval error bars Error bars that show the 95% confidence interval (CI) are wider than SE error bars. It doesn’t help to observe that two 95% CI error bars overlap, as the difference between the two means may or may not be statistically significant. Useful rule of thumb
MenuMenu Home Current issue Comment Research Archive Archive by issue Archive by category Specials, focuses & supplements Authors & referees Guide to authors For referees Submit manuscript Reporting checklist About the journal About Nature Methods About the http://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/v10/n10/full/nmeth.2659.html editors Press releases Contact the journal Subscribe For advertisers For librarians Methagora blog Home archive https://www.ncsu.edu/labwrite/res/gt/gt-stat-home.html issue This Month full text Nature Methods | This Month Print Share/bookmark Cite U Like Facebook Twitter Delicious Digg Google+ LinkedIn Reddit StumbleUpon Previous article Nature Methods | This Month The Author File: Jeff Dangl Next article Nature Methods | Correspondence ExpressionBlast: mining large, unstructured expression databases Points of Significance: Error bars Martin Krzywinski1, Naomi Altman2, Affiliations Journal name: error bars Nature Methods Volume: 10, Pages: 921–922 Year published: (2013) DOI: doi:10.1038/nmeth.2659 Published online 27 September 2013 Article tools PDF PDF Download as PDF (269 KB) View interactive PDF in ReadCube Citation Reprints Rights & permissions Article metrics The meaning of error bars is often misinterpreted, as is the statistical significance of their overlap. Subject terms: Publishing• Research data• Statistical methods At a glance Figures View all figures Figure 1: Error bar width and interpretation standard error bars of spacing depends on the error bar type. (a,b) Example graphs are based on sample means of 0 and 1 (n = 10). (a) When bars are scaled to the same size and abut, P values span a wide range. When s.e.m. bars touch, P is large (P = 0.17). (b) Bar size and relative position vary greatly at the conventional P value significance cutoff of 0.05, at which bars may overlap or have a gap. Full size image View in article Figure 2: The size and position of confidence intervals depend on the sample. On average, CI% of intervals are expected to span the mean—about 19 in 20 times for 95% CI. (a) Means and 95% CIs of 20 samples (n = 10) drawn from a normal population with mean m and s.d. σ. By chance, two of the intervals (red) do not capture the mean. (b) Relationship between s.e.m. and 95% CI error bars with increasing n. Full size image View in article Figure 3: Size and position of s.e.m. and 95% CI error bars for common P values. Examples are based on sample means of 0 and 1 (n = 10). Full size image View in article Last month in Points of Significance, we showed how samples are used to estimate population statistics. We emphasized that,
Though no one of these measurements are likely to be more precise than any other, this group of values, it is hoped, will cluster about the true value you are trying to measure. This distribution of data values is often represented by showing a single data point, representing the mean value of the data, and error bars to represent the overall distribution of the data. Let's take, for example, the impact energy absorbed by a metal at various temperatures. In this case, the temperature of the metal is the independent variable being manipulated by the researcher and the amount of energy absorbed is the dependent variable being recorded. Because there is not perfect precision in recording this absorbed energy, five different metal bars are tested at each temperature level. The resulting data (and graph) might look like this: For clarity, the data for each level of the independent variable (temperature) has been plotted on the scatter plot in a different color and symbol. Notice the range of energy values recorded at each of the temperatures. At -195 degrees, the energy values (shown in blue diamonds) all hover around 0 joules. On the other hand, at both 0 and 20 degrees, the values range quite a bit. In fact, there are a number of measurements at 0 degrees (shown in purple squares) that are very close to measurements taken at 20 degrees (shown in light blue triangles). These ranges in values represent the uncertainty in our measurement. Can we say there is any difference in energy level at 0 and 20 degrees? One way to do this is to use the descriptive statistic, mean. The mean, or average, of a group of values describes a middle point, or central tendency, about which data points vary. Without going into detail, the mean is a way of summarizing a group of data and stating a best guess at what the true value of the dependent variable value is for that independent variable level. In this example, it would be a best guess at what the true energy level was for a given temperature. The above scatter plot can be transformed into a line graph showing the mean energy values: Note that instead of creating a graph using all of the raw data, now only the mean value is plotted for impact energy. The mean was calculated for each temperature by using the AVERAGE function in Excel. You use this function by typing =AVERAGE in the formula b