I'm comparing total yield from fields under 5 different treatments. As you can see, the variance differed between the treatments (diagnostics from lm()
fit):
So I fitted the model with nlme::gls()
and a variance structure depending on the treatment:
vs <- varIdent(form= ~1|Treatment)
ls1 <- gls(Yield ~ Treatment, weights=vs, data=prod, method="ML")
When doing an anova on this model and one without 'Treatment', the effect of treatment on yield proved to be significant (p<0.05). So I wanted to see which treatments differed from each other and found the package emmeans (used to be lsmeans) which can work with gls objects.
When I run emmeans(ls1)
I get the desired output and at the bottom it says "P value adjustment: tukey method for comparing a family of 5 estimates"
I learned that one of the assumptions of Tukey's test is homoscedasticity, which is not the case here (that's why I used gls()
to begin with).
So I cannot use the results of emmeans()
?
What other options do I have?
This analyses is for a paper, can I just describe the results I've plotted without any post hoc tests and thus without reporting p-values? I've read several times that post hoc tests and reporting p-values are overrated, but then how do I report? "Figure x clearly show that treatment A differs from treatment B"? Does that suffice?
EDIT: I checked the assumptions again with the gls() modelfit and these are the standardized residuals vs the fitted values now:
I assume I can use Tukey's test then?
adjust = "mvt”
and the multivariate t distribution will be used. I doubt the adjusted p values will be much different from the Tukey ones though. $\endgroup$