Repeated Measures ANOVA Assumptions: Complete Guide 2025

TL;DR – Quick Summary

Repeated measures ANOVA requires four critical assumptions: independence of observations, normality of dependent variable, sphericity of variance-covariance matrix, and absence of extreme outliers. Sphericity violations are most common—use Mauchly’s test to check and apply Greenhouse-Geisser or Huynh-Feldt corrections when needed. The method is robust to moderate normality violations when sphericity holds.

What Are the Assumptions of Repeated Measures ANOVA?

Repeated measures ANOVA requires four fundamental assumptions that distinguish it from traditional between-subjects ANOVA: independence of observations between participants, normality of the dependent variable, sphericity of the variance-covariance matrix, and absence of extreme outliers. Understanding these assumptions is crucial because violations can lead to inflated Type I error rates and unreliable statistical conclusions in within-subject experimental designs.

Unlike one-way ANOVA, repeated measures analysis acknowledges that observations within the same participant are naturally correlated across time points or conditions. This dependency creates both statistical advantages—increased power through controlling individual differences—and new challenges requiring specialized assumption checking.

Understanding Repeated Measures ANOVA vs. Between-Subjects Design

How Repeated Measures ANOVA Differs from One-Way ANOVA

The fundamental difference lies in how these methods handle correlated observations. Traditional ANOVA assumes complete independence between all observations, treating each measurement as unrelated. Repeated measures ANOVA, however, explicitly models the correlation structure within participants while maintaining independence between different subjects.

This design offers several advantages:

Increased statistical power by controlling for individual differences
Reduced error variance through within-subject comparisons
Smaller sample sizes needed to detect meaningful effects
More efficient for longitudinal and intervention studies

When to Use Repeated Measures ANOVA

Consider repeated measures ANOVA when you have:

Longitudinal studies measuring the same participants over time
Pre-post intervention designs comparing baseline to treatment effects
Multiple condition comparisons where participants experience all treatments
Crossover trials in clinical research

For comprehensive statistical analysis techniques, explore more resources at HackandTech.com.

The Four Core Assumptions Explained

Assumption 1 – Independence of Observations

What it means: While we expect correlation within participants across time points, observations between different participants must remain completely independent.

How to verify independence:

Confirm participants were randomly sampled from the population
Ensure no participant interaction during data collection
Document proper experimental controls to prevent cross-contamination
Check for clustering effects in your sampling method

Common violations include:

Participants discussing responses between sessions
Shared environmental factors affecting multiple participants
Clustered sampling without proper statistical adjustment
Family members or friends participating together

Assumption 2 – Normality of Dependent Variable

What it means: Your dependent variable should be approximately normally distributed across all measurement occasions and groups.

Testing methods for normality:

Visual inspection:

Create histograms for each time point—look for bell-shaped distributions
Examine Q-Q plots—data points should fall along a straight diagonal line
Use boxplots to identify symmetry and outliers

Statistical tests:

Shapiro-Wilk test—reliable for smaller samples (n < 50)
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test—better for larger datasets
Anderson-Darling test—sensitive to tail departures

Pro Tip: With large samples, statistical tests may detect trivial departures from normality. Visual inspection often provides more practical insight than p-values alone.

Recent robustness research: Studies show repeated measures ANOVA remains robust to moderate normality violations when sphericity is maintained, particularly with adequate sample sizes (n > 20 per group) and distributions showing skewness and kurtosis values within reasonable ranges.

Assumption 3 – Sphericity (The Critical Assumption)

What it means: Sphericity requires that the variances of difference scores between all possible pairs of measurement occasions are equal. This is the most distinctive and frequently violated assumption in repeated measures designs.

Understanding Sphericity in Detail

Think of sphericity as requiring consistency in how much participants vary between different time points. If you have three measurement occasions (T1, T2, T3), the variance of (T1-T2) differences should roughly equal the variance of (T1-T3) and (T2-T3) differences.

Variance-covariance matrix considerations:

Compound symmetry—equal variances and covariances (stricter than sphericity)
Sphericity condition—requires only equal difference score variances
Epsilon (ε) values—measure degree of sphericity violation (1.0 = perfect sphericity)

Testing for Sphericity

Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity is the standard approach, though it has important limitations:

Interpretation guidelines:

p > 0.05: Sphericity assumption likely met
p ≤ 0.05: Sphericity violated—apply corrections
Small samples: Test may lack power to detect violations
Large samples: May over-detect trivial departures

Epsilon estimates and corrections:

Greenhouse-Geisser epsilon (ε̂ GG): Conservative correction, use when ε ≤ 0.75
Huynh-Feldt epsilon (ε̂ HF): Less conservative, use when ε > 0.75
Lower-bound correction: Most conservative option when others unavailable

Assumption 4 – No Extreme Outliers

Detection methods:

Boxplot analysis—identify observations beyond 1.5 × IQR
Standardized residuals—flag values |z| > 3.29
Cook’s distance—measure influential observations
Leverage values—identify unusual patterns

Impact on analysis: Outliers can inflate F-statistics, reduce statistical power, and bias parameter estimates, particularly in smaller samples where individual observations carry more weight.

What Happens When Assumptions Are Violated?

Sphericity Violations – The Most Common Problem

Consequences of Sphericity Violation

When sphericity is violated, several serious problems emerge:

Inflated Type I error rate—you’ll incorrectly reject true null hypotheses more often
Liberal F-test results—p-values become unreliably small
Invalid statistical conclusions—effects may appear significant when they’re not
Compromised research validity—findings become questionable

Correction Methods for Sphericity Violations

Greenhouse-Geisser Correction:

When to use: ε ≤ 0.75 or as default conservative approach
How it works: Reduces degrees of freedom to account for violation severity
Advantage: Reliably controls Type I error rate
Disadvantage: May be overly conservative, reducing power

Huynh-Feldt Correction:

When to use: ε > 0.75 and you want to retain more power
How it works: Less severe degree of freedom adjustment
Advantage: Better power retention than Greenhouse-Geisser
Disadvantage: May not adequately control Type I error in severe violations

Expert Recommendation: If Greenhouse-Geisser rejects the null hypothesis, you can confidently conclude significance. If it accepts but Huynh-Feldt rejects, trust Greenhouse-Geisser when ε ≤ 0.90.

Normality Violations – When to Worry

Robustness Research Findings

Recent Monte Carlo simulation studies provide reassuring evidence about repeated measures ANOVA’s robustness. The analysis remains reliable under non-normality when sphericity is maintained, even with distributions showing substantial skewness (up to 2.31) and kurtosis (up to 8.0).

Alternative Approaches for Severe Violations

Data transformations:

Log transformation—reduces right skewness in positive data
Square root transformation—moderate variance stabilization
Box-Cox transformation—optimal transformation based on data structure
Inverse transformation—handles extreme right skewness

Non-parametric alternatives:

Friedman test—distribution-free repeated measures comparison
Cochran’s Q test—for binary repeated measures
Bootstrap methods—resampling-based inference

Advanced modeling approaches:

Mixed-effects models—flexible covariance structures without sphericity requirement
Generalized estimating equations—robust to distributional assumptions
Multilevel modeling—handles complex nested structures

Practical Implementation in Statistical Software

SPSS Implementation

Step-by-step process:

Navigate to Analyze → General Linear Model → Repeated Measures
Define your within-subject factor and specify levels
Move variables to appropriate slots in the dialog
Click Options and select assumption tests
Review Mauchly’s test output in results

Key SPSS outputs to examine:

Mauchly’s Test of Sphericity table—check significance and epsilon values
Tests of Within-Subjects Effects—compare sphericity assumed vs. corrected results
Sphericity corrections table—Greenhouse-Geisser and Huynh-Feldt adjustments
Effect size measures—partial eta-squared for practical significance

R Implementation

Statistical analysis in Python shares many foundational concepts with computer vision applications. For more advanced Python data processing techniques, see our Python statistical analysis tutorials.

Essential R packages:

rstatix—automated assumption testing and corrections
ez—user-friendly ANOVA functions
afex—advanced factorial designs
emmeans—sophisticated post-hoc comparisons

R code example:


# Load required packages
library(rstatix)
library(dplyr)

# Perform repeated measures ANOVA with automatic assumption checking
result %
anova_test(
dv = outcome_variable,
wid = participant_id,
within = time_point
)

# Extract results with automatic sphericity correction
get_anova_table(result, correction = "auto")

# Check specific assumptions
your_data %>%
group_by(time_point) %>%
shapiro_test(outcome_variable) # Normality test

Alternative Software Options

Mastering repeated measures ANOVA is just one aspect of data science programming. Explore our comprehensive programming and development guides for more statistical computing resources.

SAS PROC GLM—enterprise-level statistical analysis with robust assumption testing
Stata—intuitive repeated measures commands with excellent documentation
Python statsmodels—open-source implementation with mixed-effects capabilities
JASP—user-friendly interface combining ease of use with statistical rigor

Advanced Topics and Modern Alternatives

Mixed-Effects Models as Robust Alternatives

Advantages over traditional repeated measures ANOVA:

Flexible covariance structures—model different correlation patterns
Missing data handling—uses all available information without listwise deletion
Unbalanced designs support—accommodates varying measurement schedules
No strict sphericity requirement—specify appropriate covariance models

When to Choose Mixed Models

Consider mixed-effects models when you have:

Complex experimental designs with multiple factors and interactions
Missing data patterns that would reduce sample size substantially
Unequal spacing of measurement occasions
Hierarchical data structures with clustering at multiple levels

MANOVA for Multivariate Approaches

Benefits of multivariate ANOVA:

No sphericity assumption—treats each time point as separate variable
Type I error protection—controls family-wise error rate across time
Multivariate effect detection—captures overall patterns of change

Limitations to consider:

Reduced power with small samples or many time points
Increased complexity in interpretation and reporting
Different assumption set—multivariate normality and homogeneity

Frequently Asked Questions

What happens if I ignore sphericity violations?

Ignoring sphericity violations leads to inflated Type I error rates, meaning you’re more likely to incorrectly reject the null hypothesis and claim significant effects that don’t actually exist. This undermines the validity of your research conclusions.

Can I use repeated measures ANOVA with missing data?

Traditional repeated measures ANOVA requires complete data for all participants. With missing data, consider mixed-effects models, multiple imputation methods, or maximum likelihood estimation approaches that can utilize all available information.

How do I know which sphericity correction to use?

Use Greenhouse-Geisser when ε ≤ 0.75 for conservative protection, and Huynh-Feldt when ε > 0.75 to retain more statistical power. When in doubt, Greenhouse-Geisser provides reliable Type I error control.

Is repeated measures ANOVA robust to normality violations?

Yes, research demonstrates that repeated measures ANOVA is quite robust to normality violations, especially when sphericity is maintained and sample sizes are adequate (n > 20 per group). The method tolerates substantial skewness and kurtosis without compromising validity.

Should I always test assumptions before running the analysis?

Absolutely. Assumption testing should be routine practice. Many violations can be corrected or accommodated through transformations, corrections, or alternative methods—but only if you know they exist beforehand.

Practical Assumption Checking Checklist

✅ Pre-Analysis Protocol

Data Preparation:

☐ Verify random sampling procedures were followed
☐ Check for data entry errors and inconsistencies
☐ Identify and appropriately handle missing values
☐ Screen for extreme outliers using multiple methods

Independence Assessment:

☐ Confirm between-subject independence in study design
☐ Document experimental controls preventing contamination
☐ Address any potential clustering effects in sampling
☐ Verify participants didn’t interact during data collection

Normality Evaluation:

☐ Create histograms and Q-Q plots for visual inspection
☐ Run Shapiro-Wilk tests (with appropriate caution for large samples)
☐ Examine residual distributions from fitted model
☐ Consider transformation options if severely violated

Sphericity Testing:

☐ Run Mauchly’s test of sphericity and interpret results
☐ Calculate epsilon values (Greenhouse-Geisser and Huynh-Feldt)
☐ Apply appropriate corrections when sphericity is violated
☐ Document correction method used and rationale

Alternative Method Consideration:

☐ Evaluate mixed-effects models for complex designs or missing data
☐ Consider MANOVA for balanced designs with sphericity concerns
☐ Assess non-parametric alternatives if assumptions severely violated
☐ Document why chosen method is most appropriate

✅ Reporting Standards

Essential Reporting Elements:

☐ Report assumption testing results transparently
☐ Specify any correction methods used and why
☐ Include effect sizes (partial eta-squared or Cohen’s f)
☐ Provide corrected degrees of freedom when applicable
☐ Document software package and version used

Transparency Requirements:

☐ Justify analytical approach chosen over alternatives
☐ Acknowledge any assumption violations encountered
☐ Explain rationale for correction methods applied
☐ Provide sensitivity analyses when assumptions are questionable

Key Takeaways for Valid Analysis

Successful repeated measures ANOVA hinges on thorough assumption checking, appropriate corrections when needed, and transparent reporting of your analytical decisions. While the method demonstrates remarkable robustness under many conditions, understanding when alternatives like mixed-effects models or MANOVA are more appropriate ensures your statistical conclusions remain both valid and meaningful.

Modern best practices emphasize:

Routine assumption testing as standard research protocol
Transparent reporting of violations and applied corrections
Consideration of robust alternatives for complex or problematic designs
Integration of effect size reporting with significance testing

By following this comprehensive approach to assumption checking and correction, researchers can confidently apply repeated measures ANOVA while maintaining the highest standards of statistical rigor and research integrity.