The 'improved' brown and forsythe test for mean equality: some things can't be fixed

Mehrotra (1997) presented an ‘;improved’ Brown and Forsythe (1974) statistic which is designed to provide a valid test of mean equality in independent groups designs when variances are heterogeneous. In particular, the usual Brown and Fosythe procedure was modified by using a Satterthwaite approximation for numerator degrees of freedom instead of the usual value of number of groups minus one. Mehrotra then, through Monte Carlo methods, demonstrated that the ‘improved’ method resulted in a robust test of significance in cases where the usual Brown and Forsythe method did not. Accordingly, this ‘improved’ procedure was recommended. We show that under conditions likely to be encountered in applied settings, that is, conditions involving heterogeneous variances as well as nonnormal data, the ‘improved’ Brown and Forsythe procedure results in depressed or inflated rates of Type I error in unbalanced designs. Previous findings indicate, however, that one can obtain a robust test by adopting a heteroscedastic statistic with the robust estimators, rather than the usual least squares estimators, and further improvement can be expected when critical significance values are obtained through bootstrapping methods.     

Comparing robust generalized variances and comments on efficiency

Numerous papers have considered the problem of comparing univariate measures of dispersion corresponding to two independent groups. This paper considers a multivariate generalization of this problem where the goal is to compare robust generalized variances. For reasons given in the paper, attention is focused on a particular W-estimator where multivariate outliers are downweighted via a projection-type outlier detection method. Included are results on the small-sample efficiency of several estimators plus comments on using the usual generalized variance.     

Chartering strategies for shipping companies

This paper describes a model which may be used in the evaluation of the relative effectiveness of policies used in the areas of ship chartering and the switching of combined carriers between the dry cargo market and the tanker market. The policies for chartering and market switching are expressed in the form of ‘desired proportions’ of the fleet operating in a particular charter-mode or a particular market. Graphical illustration of this form of expression of policies can be easily understood, so that alternative policies can be designed with relative ease. The effectiveness of a particular form of policy under various freight market conditions can be determined from the model, the use of which is illustrated by its application to the deployment of the fleet of an hypothetical shipping company. It is assumed that the feedback connection between the company's actions and the marketplace is negligible.     

Robust regression: an inferential method for determining which independent variables are most important

Consider the usual linear regression model consisting of two or more explanatory variables. There are many methods aimed at indicating the relative importance of the explanatory variables. But in general these methods do not address a fundamental issue: when all of the explanatory variables are included in the model, how strong is the empirical evidence that the first explanatory variable is more or less important than the second explanatory variable? How strong is the empirical evidence that the first two explanatory variables are more important than the third explanatory variable? The paper suggests a robust method for dealing with these issues. The proposed technique is based on a particular version of explanatory power used in conjunction with a modification of the basic percentile method.     

Beyond products: new strategic imperatives for developing competencies in dynamic environments

Strategy research has often taken a product-centered perspective. When firms compete in environments characterized by accelerating product life cycles, mass customization, and technological discontinuities, a product-centered perspective on strategy may help explain a firm’s current competitive advantage. However, this perspective adds little guidance in making strategies that create competitive advantage in the future. In this paper, we present a perspective in which dynamic environments require firms to focus on (1) building market-driven, technological, and integration competencies, not a stream of product improvements, and (2) decoupling these competencies from current products in order to create and exploit new opportunities. We discuss the perspective of products as a temporary integration of market and technology trajectories. Research propositions are presented and future implications are discussed.