Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset 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
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • 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
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Steven Wachs Leave a Comment

How do I Test my Data for Normality?

How do I Test my Data for Normality?

Many statistical tests and procedures assume that data follows a normal (bell-shaped) distribution.

For example, all of the following statistical tests, statistics, or methods assume that data is normally distributed:

  • Hypothesis tests such as t-tests, Chi-Square tests, F tests
  • Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
  • Least Squares Regression
  • Control Charts of Individuals with 3-sigma limits
  • Common formulas for process capability indices such as Cp and Cpk

Before applying statistical methods that assume normality, it is necessary to perform a normality test on the data (with some of the above methods we check residuals for normality).  We hypothesize that our data follows a normal distribution, and only reject this hypothesis if we have strong evidence to the contrary.

While it may be tempting to judge the normality of the data by simply creating a histogram of the data, this is not an objective method to test for normality – especially with sample sizes that are not very large.  With small sample sizes, discerning the shape of the histogram is difficult.  Furthermore, the shape of the histogram can change significantly by simply changing the interval width of the histogram bars.

Normal probability plotting may be used to objectively assess whether data comes from a normal distribution, even with small sample sizes.  On a normal probability plot, data that follows a normal distribution will appear linear (a straight line).  For example, a random sample of 30 data points from a normal distribution results in the first normal probability plot (below left).  Here, the data points fall close to the straight line.  The second normal probability plot (below right) illustrates data that does not come from a normal distribution.

The “P-Value” on the plot legend is based on the computed Anderson-Darling statistic and provides an objective assessment of the hypothesis that the data is normally distributed (comes from a normal distribution).  How the p-value is formally defined is an advanced subject and is not discussed in this article.  Here, we focus on the interpretation.

If the p-value is “small” (usually less than 0.05), then we have strong evidence that the data is not normal (does not come from a normal distribution).  If the p-value is “large” (usually more than 0.10), then we assume that the data is normal (comes from a normal distribution).  P-values larger than 0.10 tell us that there is not sufficient evidence to reject the normality assumption (hypothesis).  In this case, we are justified in using statistical methods that assume normality.

Many methods are available to handle non-normal data and these should be utilized when necessary.  Applying methods that assume the normal distribution when this assumption is not valid often results in incorrect conclusions.

Filed Under: Articles, Integral Concepts, on Tools & Techniques

« Grade Your RCA Effort and Print Out Your Private Report Card…
What is an Asset Management System? »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Articles by Steven Wachs, Integral Concepts
in the Integral Concepts article series

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Articles

  • So, What’s Still Wrong with Maintenance
  • Foundation of Great Project Outcomes – Structures
  • What is the Difference Between Quality Assurance and Quality Control?
  • Covariance of the Kaplan-Meier Estimators?
  • Use Of RFID In Process Safety: Track Hazardous Chemicals And Track Personnel

© 2023 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.