Talk:Blocking (statistics)
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the Randomized block design page were merged into Blocking (statistics) on 9 January 2018. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Disagree with example in article edit
The example of shoes designed to last longer, with random assignment and blocking using left and right shoes is not a better design. If the two assignments interact with each other, then both the blocking and the overall experiment fail to achieve their purpose. Suppose having one worn out shoe and one shoe that has little if any wear were to cause discomfort, strain, injury, or aesthetic displeasure. Factors such as these might cause a person to walk less, thereby confounding the experiment. Experiments don't always need "more" blocking, or blocking at lower units of analysis - they need the right level of blocking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbbozzz (talk • contribs) 05:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Completely randomized design? edit
What does he mean by completely randomized design? The assignment to one group or the other wasn't done randomly, it was done evenly between the two groups... (Also, is there such a thing as completely randomized designs?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.254.194.238 (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what she (the Wikipedia page) means. It does seem as though there is something that is called completely randomized design. Klbrain (talk) 08:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
This page describes stratification, not blocking! edit
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Specimen3a (talk • contribs) 02:37, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Main text off-topic and too many sections in Randomized Block Design edit
After the first paragraph the main intro-text seems to focus mainly on the 'blocks method' and its relevance wrt solving limit theorems, which it supports using in-text references for some strange reason (also why capitalize Probability Theory). I can only think that this is an unfortunate result of merging Randomized Block Design and Blocking or something.
As you read on there seem to be more sections than subjects. As an example: do we really need 2 separate headings for nuisance factors and blocking? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.90.41.64 (talk) 15:55, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Error in the opening paragraph? edit
The opening paragraph states: In the statistical theory of the design of experiments, blocking is the arranging of experimental units in groups (blocks) that are similar to one another.
This says that the groups are similar to one another, which is not so.
I believe the statement should instead read something like this: In the statistical theory of the design of experiments, blocking is the arranging of experimental units that are similar to one another in groups (blocks).
I will make this change. Johsebb (talk) 18:29, 4 April 2023 (UTC)