Type 1 Error Rate of Some Normality Tests

Main Article Content

Ademola Abiodun Adetunji

Abstract

Most Statistical procedures require normality of data for a reasonable interpretation and inference. Failure of this assumption invariably undermines the applicability of such data. Using a statistical method that requires normality of the data when the data is not normal will lead to misleading inference. Quite a number of procedures exist in literature in verifying the normality assumption. This paper examines simulated 10,000 normally distributed data and assessed them for normality using Anderson-Darling test (AD-test), Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (KS-test) and Shapiro-Wilk test (SW-test). The results of the analysis show that AD-test outperforms the other two tests. However, for sample size 20 or less, KS-test outperforms the rest. The sum of ranks of type 1 error rate showed that the AD-test is the best because it has the lowest rank sum. It is followed by the KS-test and the SW- test has the largest sum of ranks and hence the poorest. The type 1 error rate of each test does not show any consistent pattern as the sample size increases. Hence, it can be inferred that sample size does not have significant impact on the type I error of a test.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Scopus Citation Data

Data source Crossref
1
citations
Check Secondary Documents in Scopus
Open this article in Scopus, then check the Secondary documents tab. Use Manual Citation Fallback only for counts you have verified manually.
Open in Scopus
Citing Documents
Crossref
  1. Elias Alvarado Lagunas, Evaristo Torres Herrera (2026)
    Determinantes del éxito en la implementación de <i>Lean Manufacturing</i> en maquiladoras mexicanas
    Administración & Desarrollo, 56(1)
Similar Scopus Articles
Scopus
  1. Sato K. (2027)
    Optimal Stenting Strategy During Chemotherapy: Impact of Time to First Reintervention on Survival in Malignant Hilar Biliary Obstruction
    Den Open, 7(1)
  2. Yoshida A. (2027)
    A Step-Up Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection Strategy with Rescue Underwater Injection Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Non-Pedunculated Colorectal Lesions
    Den Open, 7(1)
  3. Ogata T. (2027)
    Phase I/II Prospective Study on Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy as Primary Drainage for Unresectable Malignant Hilar Biliary Obstruction
    Den Open, 7(1)

Article Details

How to Cite
Adetunji, A. A. (2025). Type 1 Error Rate of Some Normality Tests. Journal of Multidisciplinary Science: MIKAILALSYS, 3(1), 275-285. https://doi.org/10.58578/mikailalsys.v3i1.5234

References

Ademuyiwa, J. A., Sabri, S. R. M., & Adetunji, A. A. (2023). Modelling Count Variables: A Comparative Analysis of two Discretization Techniques. Asian Journal of Probability and Statistics, 25(2): 37-51. 10.9734/AJPAS/2023/v25i2551

Adetunji, A. A. & Sabri, S. R. M. (2023). An Alternative Count Distribution for Modelling Dispersed Observations, Pertanika Journal of Science and Technology, 31(3), 1587–1603. 10.47836/pjst.31.3.25

Althouse, L.A., Ware, W.B. & Ferron, J.M. (1998). Detecting Departures from Normality: A Monte Carlo Simulation of A New Omnibus Test based on Moments. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Anderson, T.W. & Darling, D.A. (1954). A Test of Goodness of Fit. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49(268), 765-769.

Arshad, M., Rasool, M.T. & Ahmad, M.I. (2003). Anderson Darling and Modified Anderson Darling Tests for Generalized Pareto Distribution. Pakistan Journal of Applied Sciences, 3(2), 85-88.

Conover, W.J. (1999). Practical Nonparametric Statistics. Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 428-433.

D’ Agostino, R.B. & Stephens, M.A. (1986). Goodness-of-fit Techniques, NewYork: Marcel Dekker.

Dufour J.M., Farhat, A., Gardiol, L. & Khalaf, L. (1998). Simulation-based Finite Sample Normality Tests in Linear Regressions. Econometrics Journal, 1, 154-173.

Farrel, P.J. & Stewart, K.R. (2006). Comprehensive Study Of Tests For Normality And Symmetry: Extending The Spiegelhalter Test. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 76(9), 9803–816.

Kolmogorov, A.N. (1933). Sulla determinazione empirica di una legge di distribuzione, Giornale dell’ Instituto Italiano degli Attuari 4, 83–91.

Mendes, M. & Pala, A. (2003). Type I Error Rate and Power of Three Normality Tests. Pakistan Journal of Information and Technology, 2(2), 135-139.

Nornadiah, M.R. & Bee, W.Y. (2011): Power Comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling Tests, Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics, 2(1), 21-33

Park, H.M. (2008). Univariate Analysis and Normality Test Using SAS, Stata, and SPSS. Technical Working Paper. The University Information Technology Services (UITS) Center for Statistical and Mathematical Computing, Indiana University.

Royston, P. (1995). Remark AS R94:A Remark on Algorithm AS181:The W-test for Normality. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 44(4), 547-551.

Seier, E. (2002). Comparison of Tests for Univariate Normality. InterStat Statistical Journal, 1, 1-17.

Shapiro, S.S. & Wilk, M.B. (1965). An Analysis of Variance Test for Normality (Complete Samples). Biometrika, 52(3/4), 591-611. 10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591


Explore Our Journals
Find the most suitable journal for your research. If this journal does not fully align with the scope of your manuscript, we invite you to explore our wider portfolio of journals covering diverse fields of study. Please select one of the journals below to identify the most appropriate publication platform for your work.