Bayesian ANOVA

Bayesian ANOVA

⚡ Advanced · Bayesian Statistics · ANOVA

v1.0.2

Health Sciences context — tests the difference of means among 3+ groups with BF₁₀. It reports, directly as evidence, whether the cerrahi_yontem (Klasik, Laparoskopik, Robotik) groups have an effect on iyilesme_suresi_gun.

1-way / 2-wayEtkileşim BFEtki başına BF bar grafikpingouin tabanlı + BIC fallback

🎯 What is it for?

Instead of the classic F-test and p-value, it gives a separate BF₁₀ for each effect (main effect + interaction); a direct answer to the question “which effect really matters?”.

📌 When is it used?

  • Comparing 3+ treatments/categories in the Health Sciences — Conventional vs Laparoscopic vs Robotic
  • When an interaction is present (2-way) — if the interaction BF₁₀ exceeds the main-effect BF₁₀, it changes the direction of interpretation
  • Replication: reporting an “no effect” finding with evidence

⚙ Assumptions

  1. Continuous DV (iyilesme_suresi_gun); categorical factor(s) (cerrahi_yontem).
  2. Independent observations; groups should be close to balanced.
  3. Homogeneity of variance — assumed for the pingouin BF computation.

📊 How to Run It in MerQur

1
Load the data.
2
Analysis → ⚡ Advanced → Bayesian ANOVA.
3

Panel assignments (form fields in the program):

  • Columns: {'dv': 'HbA1c', 'factor1': 'ilac', 'factor2': 'cinsiyet'}
  • Parameters: {}
4
▶ Run. A BF₁₀ bar chart for each effect + ANOVA summary.
5
In the Chart tab, a horizontal BF₁₀ bar — colored bands at the Jeffreys thresholds.

📊 Sample Dataset — Health Sciences

ℹ Note: The scenario, MerQur output and interpretation below were produced by actually running the real example dataset in MerQur. Numeric results on your own data will differ; the goal is to show how the analysis is set up and interpreted end-to-end.

🎬 Example File

This analysis is demonstrated on the following example dataset for Health Sciences:

Tip/103_bayesian_anova_drug_sex.xlsx

🎬 Scenario

We examine HbA1c’s difference across two factors (drug, sex) with Bayesian
ANOVA. For the evidential strength of factor effects, this is appropriate.

⚙️ Variable Selection

  • Dependent variable: HbA1c
  • Factor (categorical): drug
  • 2nd Factor: sex

Data Preview (First 5 Rows)

drug sex HbA1c
A female 4.85
A female 6.61
A female 5.67
A female 7.02
A female 4.18

n = 120 · Columns: drug, sex, HbA1c

📈 MerQur Output

BAYESIAN ANOVA RESULT
─────────────────────────────────────────────

drug: BF10 = 2.59e+08 (very strong evidence) outcome: HbA1c, factors: drug, sex

💬 Interpretation

We examined HbA1c’s difference across two factors (drug, sex) with Bayesian ANOVA: for drug, BF10 ~ 2.6e8, very
strong evidence. Bayesian ANOVA compares the effects of factors and their interactions via Bayes factors; it ranks
probabilistically which model (which effects) best explains the data. Unlike classical ANOVA’s “reject/don’t reject”
decision, it quantifies the relative support among models. In medicine it is used to compare the evidential strength
of factor (drug) effects.

⚠ Common Mistakes

  • Use separate Bayesian t-tests for pairwise comparison; do not over-interpret BF₁₀.
  • Unbalanced groups affect the BF estimate.
  • If there is an interaction, evaluate the main effect interpretation together with the interaction.

📚 MerQur’a Atıf

Örücü, Ö. K. (2026). MerQur: Integrated Academic Data Analysis & Reporting Platform [Computer software] (Version 1.0.0). https://doi.org/10.53463/merqur.2026001

Tüm atıf formatları →

📝 Üretim Notu — Bu sayfadaki örnek veri sentetik olarak üretilmiştir (sabit SEED=42, generator: samples/Ileri_Duzey_v102/_generate_v102_datasets.py). Sayfa içeriği Anthropic Claude desteği ile hazırlanmış, akademik doğruluk yazar tarafından kontrol edilmiştir.