MANOVA

The main idea...

Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) is the multivariate analogues of univariate ANOVA test. It thus offers a very powerful method to examine the influence of factors and their interactions across groups.Similar to ANOVA, MANOVA tests whether the assignment of objects to levels of one or more nominal explanatory variables (i.e. grouping variables) is statistically supported by response data. In contrast to ANOVA, however, this response data is contained in multiple continuous response variables rather than a single response variable (Figure 1). MANOVA is, therefore, suitable for testing the effect of different factors (e.g. experimental treatments or sampling site properties) on multiple response variables (e.g. OTU abundances). 

MANOVA assesses main effects and interactions by creating artificial response axes that maximally separate the groups defined. These artificial variables are linear combinations of the original response variables. Figure 2 illustrates how a MANOVA may detect statistically significant differences that multiple ANOVAs may not. Results of MANOVA can, at times, be visualised by multiple discriminant analysis (MDA).

 Null hypothesis

The (multivariate) vectors of means of two or more groups of objects are equal.

In addition to meeting certain assumptions (see below), a successful MANOVA requires a reasonably well-balanced experimental or sampling design. When performed correctly, this test has been shown to handle ecology data well (Warton & Hudson, 2004). If you are unfamiliar with these designs, please consult an introductory text on ANOVA-like statistics before applying MANOVA. 

Ecological data sets are often violate the parametric assumptions of MANOVA or have more variables than objects. A non-parametric form of MANOVA (NP-MANOVA), which attempts to surmount the limitations of parametric MANOVA is also available. 

Figure 1: a) ANOVA-like methods assess if the difference between group means along a single response variable is significant by comparing the within- and between-group sums of squared differences from those means. b) MANOVA assesses the joint distributions of more than one response variable. Rather than a single mean per group, vectors of each response variable's mean are analysed. See Figure 2 for further detail.

Figure 2: a) Examining the single-variable distributions of the three groups shown above (curves on individual axes) may prevent detection of significant differences observed when the joint distributions of both response variables are taken into account (ellipses). b) In MANOVA, linear combinations of the original response variables (grey axes) are used to create a composite variable (black axis) that maximally separates groups.

Results and interpretation

MANOVA results are very similar to those of ANOVA. A value of some test statistic (described below), the number of degrees of freedom of the test, and a p-value associated with the test statistic are displayed. Whether or not the p-value is small enough to label the test statistic significant is of primary interest. A significant rejection of the null hypothesis suggests that there is a significant difference between the vectors of means of two or more groups; however, it will not tell you which groups are significantly different from the others or which response variables account for that difference. Post hoc tests, such as a series of univariate F-tests (with corrections for multiple testing) are required to discover which variables account for this difference.

Statistics

A number of statistics can be used to test the null hypothesis of equality of mean vectors. Some MANOVA implementations will translate these statistics, either exactly or approximately, into F-statistics prior to output in order to facilitate the calculation of p-values. If there are only two groups in the data, these statistics are equivalent and the Hotelling's T test may be used. Some of these tests are more liberal (Type I errors more likely) while others are conservative (Type II errors more likely). 

In general, Wilks' λ is used as a default test statistic. The Hotelling-Lawley trace would be used in a very controlled experimental setting where the design and data meet MANOVA's assumptions very well. Pillai's trace would be used, at the expense of power, if there are several, non-remediable assumption violations or an unbalanced experimental design. The conservatism of Roy's largest root may vary, and use of this statistic should be considered in the scenario described above.

Key assumptions

Warnings

Implementations

References