Main Article Content
The paper briefly discusses the balanced incomplete–block design (BIBD’s) and further compares two methods of analyzing them-the classical and vector space analysis of variance (ANOVA) methods. These methods are applied differently to the data arising from the balanced incomplete block designs (BIBD’s). The basic interest is to compare the performance of the two methods of analysis on the available data from National Root Crop Research Institute (N.R.C.R.I) Umudike, Abia State. To achieve this, we shall consider treatment (adjusted), block (adjusted) treatment (not adjusted) in the classical ANOVA method and the vector space ANOVA method. Block is adjusted to know if the experiment is symmetric balanced incomplete block design (SBIBD). The classical ANOVA method was easier to compute and more convenient to handle than the vector ANOVA method. The classical ANOVA method is found to be preferable to the vector space ANOVA method.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).