Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Bartlett’s Test for Homogeneity of Variances

by Fred Schenkelberg 9 Comments

Bartlett’s Test for Homogeneity of Variances

Bartlett’s Test for Homogeneity of Variances

A common assumption when comparing three or more normal population means is they have similar (the same) population variances.

ANOVA and some DOE analysis results rely on the underlying data having similar variances. If this assumption is not true, the conclusions suggested by the ANOVA or DOE may be misleading.

It doesn’t take long to check.

Test for homogeneity of variance

M. S. Bartlett in 1937 published the paper Properties of Sufficiency and Statistical Tests.

The process to check if samples drawn from possibly different populations have equal variances later became known as Bartlett’s Test.

This is particularly useful when comparing population means and making the assumption the related variances are equal.

Bartlett’s Test is accomplished using the structure of a hypothesis test. Setting up the null and alternative hypothesis, calculating test statistic and comparing to a critical value to make a conclusion.

Note: Bartlett’s test is not robust from departures from normality, thus test for normality first. A robust test for homogeneity of variance to consider is the nonparametric Levene’s Test.

Barlett’s Test step-by-step

Hypotheses

The null hypothesis is all the population variances (k populations being compared) are equal.

$$ \displaystyle\large {{H}_{0}}:\sigma _{1}^{2}=\sigma _{1}^{2}=\ldots =\sigma _{k}^{2}$$

The alternative hypothesis is the population variances are not all equal. This means at least one is not equal to the others. The test does not explicitly determine which one is different, just that at least one is different.

A box plot may help identify the offending sample variance.

Test statistic

For each population, draw a sample of size ni from the i-th population where i = 1, 2, … , k. Calculate the sample variance from each sample.

Later we will need the degrees of freedom, υi. The i-th sample has υi = ni – 1 degrees of freedom. Overall for this test the degrees of freedom is

$$ \displaystyle\large \upsilon =\sum\limits_{i=1}^{k}{{{\upsilon }_{i}}}$$

The combined sample variance is

$$ \displaystyle\large {{s}^{2}}=\frac{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{k}{{{\upsilon }_{i}}s_{i}^{2}}}{\upsilon }$$

Finally, we can calculate the test statistic, M, which Bartlett determined as

$$ \displaystyle\large M=\upsilon \ln {{s}^{2}}-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{k}{{{\upsilon }_{i}}\ln s_{i}^{2}.}$$

Bartlett recognized the test statistic is bias and suggested dividing M by

$$ \displaystyle\large C=1+\frac{1}{3\left( k-1 \right)}\left[ \left( \sum\limits_{i=1}^{k}{\frac{1}{{{\upsilon }_{i}}}} \right)-\frac{1}{\upsilon } \right].$$

Thus, use the corrected test statistic M / C.

Critical value

Bartlett showed that M is approximately distributed as χ2k-1. This approximation is suitable when each sample, ni, has at least 5.

The critical value is

$$ \displaystyle\large \chi _{1-\alpha ,k-1}^{2}$$

With 1-α confidence and k-1 degrees of freedom.

Conclusion

If M/C greater than the critical value reject the null hypotheses at the alpha significance level and conclude at least one population variance is different from the others.

If M/C is less than or equal to the critical value, conclude there is insufficient evidence to reject the null hypotheses.

This doesn’t mean the variance is actually equal, we just do not enough data to prove that at least one is different.

Filed Under: Articles, CRE Preparation Notes, Probability and Statistics for Reliability Tagged With: Hypothesis testing

About Fred Schenkelberg

I am the reliability expert at FMS Reliability, a reliability engineering and management consulting firm I founded in 2004. I left Hewlett Packard (HP)’s Reliability Team, where I helped create a culture of reliability across the corporation, to assist other organizations.

« Plot Your Derating Guidelines
Chain drives – some experiences in the field »

Comments

  1. Usman Rayyanu Dabai says

    October 8, 2018 at 5:52 AM

    Thanks for this lit info. It helps alot.
    I will be much grateful if you can get back to me, on how use the bartlette procedure when the sample size is extremely large.

    Thanks to you, in anticipation.

    Reply
    • Fred Schenkelberg says

      October 8, 2018 at 7:30 AM

      Hi Usman,

      Glad to hear the article is useful. For large sample sizes, no change that I know of to the procedure. What is it you are having trouble with when checking large populations? Be sure to check for normality first.

      Cheers,

      Fred

      Reply
  2. Ramses says

    April 20, 2020 at 2:31 PM

    Is Barlette’s test used as a replacement for ANOVA or are they normally used together?

    Reply
    • Fred Schenkelberg says

      April 20, 2020 at 3:46 PM

      If there is any doubt, or as a general practice, check using Bartletts test that the variances are homogeneous (or similar) before continuing the analysis using DOE or ANOVA. Bartlett is not a substitute for ANOVA, it is one method to check one of the common assumptions made when using ANOVA.

      Cheers,

      Fred

      Reply
  3. Ruth Palsson says

    August 1, 2020 at 12:17 AM

    Hello,
    How robust is this test for sample sizes of four groups of 10?
    Thanks,
    Ruth

    Reply
    • Fred Schenkelberg says

      August 1, 2020 at 6:18 AM

      Hi Ruth,

      I do not know. Try running a simulation using variations in values to see if the technique consistently picks up on the differences or not.

      cheers,

      Fred

      Reply
  4. Ruth Palsson says

    August 13, 2020 at 1:03 AM

    Thanks Fred,
    Ruth

    Reply
  5. Jimmy bredal Wolfsen says

    November 20, 2020 at 3:00 AM

    Can you refer to some rigid calculation in the matter of M being bias and M/C is unbiased. I got an asignment where i need to describe the theory behind bartlett and so-called adjustment factor, which i assume is simular to the correction.
    Thanks Jimmy

    Reply
    • Fred Schenkelberg says

      November 20, 2020 at 7:47 AM

      Hi Jimmy,

      sorry, not aware of any such rigid calculations

      cheers,

      Fred

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CRE Preparation Notes

Article by Fred Schenkelberg

Join Accendo

Join our members-only community for full access to exclusive eBooks, webinars, training, and more.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Get Full Site Access

Not ready to join?
Stay current on new articles, podcasts, webinars, courses and more added to the Accendo Reliability website each week.
No membership required to subscribe.

[popup type="" link_text="Get Weekly Email Updates" link_class="button" ][display_form id=266][/popup]

  • CRE Preparation Notes
  • CRE Prep
  • Reliability Management
  • Probability and Statistics for Reliability
  • Reliability in Design and Development
  • Reliability Modeling and Predictions
  • Reliability Testing
  • Maintainability and Availability
  • Data Collection and Use

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy