# Testing manova assumptions in radiometric dating

### What are the assumptions for MANOVA and how I should apply it in R? - Cross Validated

IMPORTANCE OF PARAMETRIC ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING MANOVA Mul ti variate analysis of variance (MANOVA) is a common statistical procedure. INTRODUCTION Radiocarbon dating of the topmost horizon of soils buried under terrace ﬁlls The consistency of this assumption depends on the absence of (1) external carbon .. Table 1 Results of the MANOVA and effect size (f 2) tests. I was wondering if anyone could help me with a question regarding the assumptions for a statistical test I am running as part of a manuscript that I am revising.

If there is a problem here, then the multivariate normality assumption may be violated of course you may find that each variable is normally distributed but the random vectors are not multivariate normally distributed. For Example 1 of Manova Basic Conceptsfor each dependent variable we can use the ExtractCol supplemental function to extract the data for that variable by group and then use the Descriptive Statistics and Normality supplemental data analysis tool contained in the Real Statistics Resource Pack.

Then enter Ctrl-m and select Descriptive Statistics and Normality from the menu. When a dialog box appears, enter F5: I13 in the Input Range and chose the following options: The resulting output is shown in Figure 1.

Finally the Shapiro-Wilk test shows that none of the samples shows a significant departure from normality. The results are pretty similar for Yield. Also the results for Herbicide show that the sample is normally distributed, but the box plot shows that there may be a potential outlier.

The kurtosis value shown in the descriptive statistics for loam is 3. We return to this issue shortly. We can also construct QQ plots for each of the 12 combinations of groups and dependent variables using the QQ Plot data analysis tool provided by the Real Statistics Resource Pack.

The chart that results, as displayed in Figure 2, shows a pretty good fit with the normal distribution assumption i.

It is very difficult to show multivariate normality. One indicator is to construct scatter plots for the sample data for each of pair of dependent variables. If the distribution is multivariate normal the cross sections in two dimensions should be in the form of an ellipse or straight line in the extreme case. The resulting chart is shown in Figure 3.

The resulting chart is shown in Figure 4. Click on any of the points in series 1 and hit the Delete or Backspace key. This erases the blue series and only the desired red series remains.

### one-way manova analysis: Topics by dubaiescortss.info

Adding the title and removing the legend produces the scatter chart in Figure 5. As mentioned above, the multivariate normality assumption is sensitive to the presence of outliers. Here we need to be concerned with both univariate and multivariate outliers.

If outliers are detected they can be dealt with in a fashion similar to the univariate case. For the univariate case, generally we need to look at data elements with a z-score of more than 3 or less than -3 or 2.

Several enlargements carried out in later periods extended the hydraulic system to its current dimensions, which were fully reached by AD Regarding history and archaeology, three Andalusi settlements have been found in three different hills around the hoya: The inset shows the location of Ricote in modern SE Spain.

## MANOVA Assumptions

The trenches were dug perpendicularly to the supporting walls in uncultivated patches of terrain. The depth was chosen to reach the B horizon of the original slope soil before terrace construction to fully expose Ab horizons Puy and Balbo Whenever visible such as for Downloaded from http: Figure 2 Topography of the Andalusi irrigated terrace cluster: Whenever possible, we prioritized collecting AMS samples following vertical transects from bottom to top.

Field Description and Soil Macromorphology The excavated terraces extend over 0. The black dots show the location of the charred samples collected for 14C dating.

The black stars show the position of the samples dated by means of the bulk organic fraction. Dates are 14C ages. Ab horizons were located at cm T1cm T2cm T3and 95 cm T4 below the current surface of the terraces, whose slope ranged between 0. The buried soils had a slope ranging between 1.

Those of the Ab horizons were darker, ranging from dark gray to very dark gray. Except the buried soil in T3, which sloped eastwards towards a vertical alignment of angular and subangular clasts 60 cm thick, the rest were found to be mainly even, continuous, and parallel to the current surface of the terraces.

No signs of plowing or hoeing were observed in any of the Ab horizons. All Ab horizons contained a few snail shells and channels. Total carbon TC was determined on mg powdered samples. Statistical calculations and the description of the grain size distribution followed Folk and Ward and were done using Gradistat 8.

All p values were set at 0. Shapiro-Wilk tests were conducted afterwards to check whether the dependent variables were normally distributed in each independent group. Exclusion of the remaining grain or carbon fractions aimed at avoiding multicolinearity, a potential issue for the MANOVA when dealing with dependent variables that are weighted averages of the others.

The different size fractions were observed under a binocular lens to collect the charred material from the sediment. With the exception of sample 3 3 mgall samples contained less than 2 mg of charred material. Since no datable macrofossils were found in samples 4, 12, and 13, the bulk organic fraction was dated after removing the carbonates.

Figure 4 Boxplots untransformed data without outliers showing the scores for each dependent variable. The other 14C dates were obtained on charred material.

For samples 3, 7, and 14, we dated single charcoal particles. For the rest, we dated a mixed sample of all charred fragments found in one sediment sample after sieving the sediment. The results are shown in Figure 5 and indicate the following: Silt and CaCO3 had the largest effect size f.

Sand, silt, and clay had the largest effect size f. We decided to keep the multivariate outliers anyway, as further tests revealed that they were not correctable. On these grounds, we rejected the null hypothesis Ho for all four terraces. The age of the samples was correlated with depth in every excavated terrace.

Overall, the latest age of the charred material contained in the topmost horizon of the four buried soils clustered around the 10th—13th centuries AD. No outliers values falling more than 1. Which fraction is most convenient depends on soil type and vegetation as well as on the target of the dating. Martin and Johnson pointed out that the humic fraction works better for dating the burial of Holocene soils, as it generally provides the youngest age.

However, for irrigated terraces in semiarid environments, the combination of coarse material and percolating water may promote the downward translocation of humic acids from the current soil surface to the buried soil, thus making the date for terrace construction younger Hammond et al. This scenario suggests a possible contamination of the buried soils with humic acids leached from above.

The insoluble humin fraction, on the other hand, may provide older dates for soil burial, since it is the most stable organic fraction and roughly represents the age of the soil Becker-Heidmann et al. The bulk organic fraction consists of a mixture of different organic compounds with different ages and turnover rates, likely providing insight into the mean residence time MRT of the soil Downloaded from http: Table 2 Summary of 14C dates.

In that sense, Eckmeier et al. We interpret horizon 2Apb in T1 as being the former cropping surface of the terrace, according to the evenly horizontal distribution of centimetric charcoal fragments of Olea europaea and the presence of pottery sherds.

Thus, the original slope soil in T1 3Ab was probably located only 25 cm below the ground during at least yr, with higher chances to be disturbed by soil tillage and cropping carried out on the former terrace surface. This evidence suggests absence of mixing in all terraces and point towards a negligible contamination of horizon 3Ab in T1 with younger charred material translocated from above.

Older carbon may be brought to the soil surface from deeper horizons by erosion or bioturbation Matthews Both processes disturb the soil and rearrange its structure. Research carried out by Sadiki et al. Buried soils that have remained undisturbed also present a different magnetic mineralogy compared with the overlying sediments Fine et al. Contrasting Mag Sus values between buried soils and topping deposits should be expected even if the latter had originally been the same underlying soil, since shifting rearranges the alignment of ferrimagnetic minerals.

Ab horizons in Ricote showed both a regular increase in Mag Sus values from the bottom up, with the highest Mag Sus values on top Figure 6and a linear relationship between the age of the organic matter ands depth Downloaded from http: Table 2which is a typical feature of stable soils developed in warm, well-drained settings Matthews ; Wang et al. This evidence points towards a lack of relevant disturbance in the original slope soils before and after terrace construction.

The Andalusi terraces in Ricote were constructed on top of highly different soils.

### MANOVA Assumptions | Real Statistics Using Excel

T1 was likely built on a seasonally waterlogged terrain, while T2—T4 were built on carbonatic soils. This diversity probably required the farmers to implement different strategies in order to prepare the terrain before building up the terraces.

The sloping of the Ab horizon in T3 towards a vertical alignment of stones suggests that it could have been a relict terrace surface. However, the physicochemical data available to date do not indicate that the Ab horizon in T3 is different from the rest of the buried soils in terms of their carbon contents or texture. Regarding the Ab horizon in T1, drainage is needed in hydromorphic terrains to prevent landslides and protect the stability of the terrace cluster in case of heavy precipitations and mounding of the groundwater.

A 14C date obtained from a single terrace should a priori be taken also as a date for the construction of the cluster in which the dated terrace is included, providing that its limits and extension have already been determined.

Whether from single isolated terraces Benedict ; Branch et al. Dating of decontextualized terraces, whether single isolated or scattered, has two major drawbacks: Even if the dates of two or more buried soils overlap, it may not necessarily mean that they were topped at the same stage.

The lack of overlapping may suggest contamination or the dating of organic material already in the soil long before terracing. The youngest dates obtained from the topmost horizon of the Ricote buried soils clearly assemble around the 10th—13th centuries: This approach helped ruling out contamination or disturbance of the buried soils before and after the construction of the Ricote Andalusi irrigated terraces. Dating of the bulk organic fraction should be avoided when aiming for precise absolute dates for the construction of terraces, even when there is no charred material available.

Obtaining multiple datings from the topmost part of different Ab horizons buried under synchronically constructed terraces contributes overcoming this issue. We cannot fully reject the possibility of the dated irrigated-terraced cluster of Ricote being not the original one, but an enlargement of a pre-existing Andalusi irrigated scheme whose location and extension remains unknown.

Dr Stephan Opitz University of Cologne helped in arranging the soil analyses. All mistakes and shortcomings remain exclusively our own. Bayesian analysis of Paleosol charcoal: Earthworm activity and archaeo- the Neolithic. A case study in the Eastern French logical stratigraphy: Journal of Archaeological Science and processes.