GITNUXREPORT 2026

Completely Randomized Design Statistics

CRD randomly assigns treatments to homogeneous units for simple, unbiased analysis.

Rajesh Patel

Rajesh Patel

Team Lead & Senior Researcher with over 15 years of experience in market research and data analytics.

First published: Feb 13, 2026

Our Commitment to Accuracy

Rigorous fact-checking · Reputable sources · Regular updatesLearn more

Key Statistics

Statistic 1

CRD advantages include simplicity, no need for blocking, and unbiased estimates under randomization.

Statistic 2

CRD is easiest to randomize and analyze computationally with standard ANOVA.

Statistic 3

Disadvantages: inefficient if experimental units vary greatly (high error variance).

Statistic 4

CRD robustness to model misspecification higher than complex designs.

Statistic 5

Limitation: cannot control for known sources of variation like blocks.

Statistic 6

Advantage: valid inference via randomization regardless of population model.

Statistic 7

CRD requires fewer units than RCBD for same precision if homogeneous.

Statistic 8

Disadvantage: low power when nuisance factors present (e.g., soil gradients).

Statistic 9

Advantage: flexible for unequal replication without bias.

Statistic 10

Limitation: sensitive to outliers, as no blocking dilutes their impact.

Statistic 11

CRD ideal for lab settings with uniform conditions (advantage).

Statistic 12

Disadvantage: cannot estimate block effects or interactions with blocks.

Statistic 13

Advantage: straightforward power and sample size planning.

Statistic 14

Limitation: higher CV% compared to blocked designs in field trials.

Statistic 15

CRD efficiency factor = 1, baseline for comparing other designs.

Statistic 16

Advantage: supports randomization tests for non-normal data.

Statistic 17

Disadvantage: no adjustment for covariates without ANCOVA extension.

Statistic 18

CRD cheaper to implement than designs requiring stratification.

Statistic 19

Limitation: poor for spatial heterogeneity; geostatistics needed.

Statistic 20

Advantage: theoretical foundation for causal inference in experiments.

Statistic 21

Disadvantage: assumes perfect randomization; poor implementation biases results.

Statistic 22

CRD used in agriculture for fertilizer trials on uniform plots.

Statistic 23

In pharmaceutical screening, CRD tests drug dosages on cell cultures.

Statistic 24

CRD applied in food science for taste panels with homogeneous tasters.

Statistic 25

Manufacturing example: CRD for machine settings on identical parts.

Statistic 26

Psychology: CRD for memory tasks across random subject assignment.

Statistic 27

Agronomy case: CRD in greenhouse for seed varieties, 5 treatments, 4 reps.

Statistic 28

Toxicology: CRD dosing levels on uniform rodent batches.

Statistic 29

Education research: CRD for teaching methods on similar students.

Statistic 30

Chemical engineering: CRD catalyst types on lab reactors.

Statistic 31

Horticulture: CRD irrigation regimes in controlled chambers.

Statistic 32

Case study: CRD in wheat yield trial, F=4.2, p=0.01, 3 varieties.

Statistic 33

Marketing: CRD ad exposure levels on consumer panels.

Statistic 34

Fisheries: CRD feed types on fish growth in tanks.

Statistic 35

Example: CRD battery life test, 4 brands, MSE=12.5, CV=8%.

Statistic 36

Environmental science: CRD pollutant effects on algae cultures.

Statistic 37

Case: CRD in ANOVA textbook, paint drying times, t=4, N=20.

Statistic 38

Genetics: CRD gene expression under treatments in cell lines.

Statistic 39

Automotive: CRD fuel additives on engine dynos.

Statistic 40

Nutrition: CRD diet plans on weight loss in clinic patients.

Statistic 41

Brewing: CRD yeast strains on fermentation rate.

Statistic 42

CRD assumes independent errors with constant variance σ² across all treatments.

Statistic 43

Normality assumption in CRD states that ε_ij ~ iid N(0, σ²) for valid F-test.

Statistic 44

Homogeneity of variance (homoscedasticity) is required; tested via Levene's or Bartlett's test.

Statistic 45

Independence of observations is ensured by randomization in CRD assignment process.

Statistic 46

Additivity assumption implies no interaction between treatments and units, holding under homogeneity.

Statistic 47

CRD requires experimental units to be homogeneous; otherwise, blocking is needed.

Statistic 48

No carryover effects assumed in CRD, suitable for non-sequential experiments.

Statistic 49

Linearity not directly assumed, but model is linear in parameters for OLS estimation.

Statistic 50

CRD assumes fixed treatment effects; random effects model alternative uses mixed models.

Statistic 51

Violation of normality can be checked with Shapiro-Wilk test per treatment.

Statistic 52

Residual plots in CRD should show random scatter around zero for assumptions hold.

Statistic 53

CRD requires sufficient replicates (r ≥ 2) to estimate σ² unbiasedly.

Statistic 54

No outliers assumed; influence diagnostics like Cook's distance used to check.

Statistic 55

Multicollinearity not an issue in single-factor CRD due to indicator coding.

Statistic 56

CRD assumes no covariates; if present, use ANCOVA instead.

Statistic 57

Randomization justifies inference even if strict normality fails (randomization tests).

Statistic 58

CRD model assumes no time trends or spatial correlations in unit responses.

Statistic 59

Violation of independence leads to inflated type I error; check Durbin-Watson.

Statistic 60

CRD requires treatments to be applied without contamination between units.

Statistic 61

Homoscedasticity tested by plotting residuals vs fitted values in CRD ANOVA.

Statistic 62

CRD assumes measurable response variable continuous for parametric tests.

Statistic 63

No missing data assumed; imputation biases estimates if violated.

Statistic 64

In Completely Randomized Design (CRD), treatments are assigned to experimental units entirely at random, ensuring each unit has an equal probability of receiving any treatment, which eliminates systematic bias in assignment.

Statistic 65

CRD is the simplest type of experimental design, requiring no blocking or stratification, making it suitable for homogeneous experimental units.

Statistic 66

The degrees of freedom in CRD for treatments is (t-1), where t is the number of treatments, and for error is (N-t), with N total observations.

Statistic 67

In CRD, the total variability is decomposed as SST = SSTreatments + SSE, where SSTreatments measures between-treatment variation and SSE within-treatment.

Statistic 68

CRD assumes that the experimental material is homogeneous, so no blocking is needed, simplifying the randomization process.

Statistic 69

The randomization in CRD is achieved by randomly permuting treatment labels across all N units, often using random number generators.

Statistic 70

CRD requires a minimum of two treatments and replicates per treatment to estimate error variance reliably.

Statistic 71

In CRD, the design matrix has one column per treatment indicator, with orthogonal contrasts possible for t treatments.

Statistic 72

CRD is equivalent to a one-way ANOVA model where Y_ij = μ + τ_i + ε_ij, with ε_ij ~ N(0,σ²).

Statistic 73

The efficiency of CRD is 100% relative to itself but lower than blocked designs if material is heterogeneous.

Statistic 74

CRD uses simple random sampling without replacement for assignment when N is finite.

Statistic 75

In CRD, the expected mean square for treatments is σ² + (n/ t) Σ τ_i², where n is replicates per treatment.

Statistic 76

CRD randomization distribution is uniform over all possible treatment assignments.

Statistic 77

For CRD, power calculations use non-central F distribution with non-centrality parameter λ = n Σ τ_i² / σ².

Statistic 78

CRD is optimal under the Neyman model for minimizing variance of treatment contrasts when variances are equal.

Statistic 79

In software like R, CRD is implemented via factor() and aov() functions for analysis.

Statistic 80

CRD layout can be visualized as a single factor with levels repeated r times randomly.

Statistic 81

Historical origin of CRD traces to R.A. Fisher’s 1920s work at Rothamsted Experimental Station.

Statistic 82

CRD requires complete data collection on all units without missing values for standard ANOVA.

Statistic 83

In CRD, the covariance between any two observations from different treatments is zero under randomization.

Statistic 84

CRD supports multiple comparisons via Tukey HSD or Bonferroni adjustments post-ANOVA.

Statistic 85

The F-test in CRD tests H0: all τ_i = 0 against Ha: not all equal, with F = MSTr / MSE.

Statistic 86

CRD sample size determination uses α, power(1-β), σ, and minimum detectable difference δ.

Statistic 87

In balanced CRD, each treatment has exactly r replicates, maximizing power.

Statistic 88

Unbalanced CRD uses Type III sums of squares in ANOVA to handle unequal replicates.

Statistic 89

CRD is robust to mild violations of normality but sensitive to heteroscedasticity.

Statistic 90

Simulation studies show CRD maintains type I error rate close to α under randomization.

Statistic 91

CRD extensions include factorial CRD for multiple factors without blocking.

Statistic 92

CRD is foundational for understanding more complex designs like RCBD.

Statistic 93

In CRD, the least squares estimator for τ_i is the treatment mean bar{Y}_i.

Statistic 94

CRD analysis uses ANOVA F-test: F = (SSTr/(t-1)) / (SSE/(N-t)) ~ F(t-1, N-t).

Statistic 95

Treatment means compared using LSD test with critical value t_α/2,∞ * sqrt(MSE/r).

Statistic 96

Confidence interval for τ_i - τ_j is bar{Y}_i - bar{Y}_j ± t_{(N-t),1-α/2} * sqrt(2 MSE / r).

Statistic 97

In R, CRD analyzed with summary(aov(response ~ treatment, data)).

Statistic 98

Tukey HSD in CRD: q_α(t, N-t) * sqrt(MSE / r) for pairwise differences.

Statistic 99

Power of CRD F-test computed as 1 - β = P(F' > F_α | λ), non-central F.

Statistic 100

Scheffe multiple comparison in CRD uses (t-1) F_α * MSE / r for intervals.

Statistic 101

Residual analysis: standardized residuals |z| < 3 indicate no anomalies.

Statistic 102

Effect size in CRD: η² = SSTr / SST, partial η² = SSTr / (SSTr + SSE).

Statistic 103

Non-parametric alternative to CRD ANOVA is Kruskal-Wallis test.

Statistic 104

Model diagnostics include Q-Q plots for normality of residuals in CRD.

Statistic 105

Variance of bar{Y}_i in CRD is σ² / r, estimated by MSE / r.

Statistic 106

Dunnett test for CRD control vs treatments: critical t from studentized range.

Statistic 107

Bootstrap confidence intervals for treatment effects in CRD via resampling residuals.

Statistic 108

Likelihood ratio test for fixed effects in CRD under normality.

Statistic 109

Randomization tests in CRD: permute labels 9999 times for p-value.

Statistic 110

REML estimation for σ² in unbalanced CRD mixed models.

Statistic 111

Box-Cox transformation applied to response if variance stabilizes.

Statistic 112

Trend analysis in CRD for quantitative treatments using orthogonal polynomials.

Statistic 113

Simultaneous confidence bands for all contrasts in CRD via Scheffe.

Statistic 114

Welch ANOVA for heteroscedastic CRD, adjusting df via Welch-Satterthwaite.

Trusted by 500+ publications
Harvard Business ReviewThe GuardianFortune+497
Imagine your experiment’s outcome depended entirely on a roll of the dice—that’s the elegantly simple, bias-busting premise of the Completely Randomized Design (CRD).

Key Takeaways

  • In Completely Randomized Design (CRD), treatments are assigned to experimental units entirely at random, ensuring each unit has an equal probability of receiving any treatment, which eliminates systematic bias in assignment.
  • CRD is the simplest type of experimental design, requiring no blocking or stratification, making it suitable for homogeneous experimental units.
  • The degrees of freedom in CRD for treatments is (t-1), where t is the number of treatments, and for error is (N-t), with N total observations.
  • CRD assumes independent errors with constant variance σ² across all treatments.
  • Normality assumption in CRD states that ε_ij ~ iid N(0, σ²) for valid F-test.
  • Homogeneity of variance (homoscedasticity) is required; tested via Levene's or Bartlett's test.
  • CRD analysis uses ANOVA F-test: F = (SSTr/(t-1)) / (SSE/(N-t)) ~ F(t-1, N-t).
  • Treatment means compared using LSD test with critical value t_α/2,∞ * sqrt(MSE/r).
  • Confidence interval for τ_i - τ_j is bar{Y}_i - bar{Y}_j ± t_{(N-t),1-α/2} * sqrt(2 MSE / r).
  • CRD advantages include simplicity, no need for blocking, and unbiased estimates under randomization.
  • CRD is easiest to randomize and analyze computationally with standard ANOVA.
  • Disadvantages: inefficient if experimental units vary greatly (high error variance).
  • CRD used in agriculture for fertilizer trials on uniform plots.
  • In pharmaceutical screening, CRD tests drug dosages on cell cultures.
  • CRD applied in food science for taste panels with homogeneous tasters.

CRD randomly assigns treatments to homogeneous units for simple, unbiased analysis.

Advantages and Limitations

  • CRD advantages include simplicity, no need for blocking, and unbiased estimates under randomization.
  • CRD is easiest to randomize and analyze computationally with standard ANOVA.
  • Disadvantages: inefficient if experimental units vary greatly (high error variance).
  • CRD robustness to model misspecification higher than complex designs.
  • Limitation: cannot control for known sources of variation like blocks.
  • Advantage: valid inference via randomization regardless of population model.
  • CRD requires fewer units than RCBD for same precision if homogeneous.
  • Disadvantage: low power when nuisance factors present (e.g., soil gradients).
  • Advantage: flexible for unequal replication without bias.
  • Limitation: sensitive to outliers, as no blocking dilutes their impact.
  • CRD ideal for lab settings with uniform conditions (advantage).
  • Disadvantage: cannot estimate block effects or interactions with blocks.
  • Advantage: straightforward power and sample size planning.
  • Limitation: higher CV% compared to blocked designs in field trials.
  • CRD efficiency factor = 1, baseline for comparing other designs.
  • Advantage: supports randomization tests for non-normal data.
  • Disadvantage: no adjustment for covariates without ANCOVA extension.
  • CRD cheaper to implement than designs requiring stratification.
  • Limitation: poor for spatial heterogeneity; geostatistics needed.
  • Advantage: theoretical foundation for causal inference in experiments.
  • Disadvantage: assumes perfect randomization; poor implementation biases results.

Advantages and Limitations Interpretation

The Completely Randomized Design is the scientific equivalent of a blunt instrument: elegantly simple and unbiased in theory, but often tragically inefficient and deaf to the whispers of environmental variation in practice.

Applications and Case Studies

  • CRD used in agriculture for fertilizer trials on uniform plots.
  • In pharmaceutical screening, CRD tests drug dosages on cell cultures.
  • CRD applied in food science for taste panels with homogeneous tasters.
  • Manufacturing example: CRD for machine settings on identical parts.
  • Psychology: CRD for memory tasks across random subject assignment.
  • Agronomy case: CRD in greenhouse for seed varieties, 5 treatments, 4 reps.
  • Toxicology: CRD dosing levels on uniform rodent batches.
  • Education research: CRD for teaching methods on similar students.
  • Chemical engineering: CRD catalyst types on lab reactors.
  • Horticulture: CRD irrigation regimes in controlled chambers.
  • Case study: CRD in wheat yield trial, F=4.2, p=0.01, 3 varieties.
  • Marketing: CRD ad exposure levels on consumer panels.
  • Fisheries: CRD feed types on fish growth in tanks.
  • Example: CRD battery life test, 4 brands, MSE=12.5, CV=8%.
  • Environmental science: CRD pollutant effects on algae cultures.
  • Case: CRD in ANOVA textbook, paint drying times, t=4, N=20.
  • Genetics: CRD gene expression under treatments in cell lines.
  • Automotive: CRD fuel additives on engine dynos.
  • Nutrition: CRD diet plans on weight loss in clinic patients.
  • Brewing: CRD yeast strains on fermentation rate.

Applications and Case Studies Interpretation

CRD is the statistical equivalent of a fair referee, ensuring that any victory in the experiment—whether it's a tastier yeast, a heartier wheat, or a longer-lasting battery—can be celebrated without the nagging suspicion that the winner simply had better fans or a nicer locker room.

Assumptions and Requirements

  • CRD assumes independent errors with constant variance σ² across all treatments.
  • Normality assumption in CRD states that ε_ij ~ iid N(0, σ²) for valid F-test.
  • Homogeneity of variance (homoscedasticity) is required; tested via Levene's or Bartlett's test.
  • Independence of observations is ensured by randomization in CRD assignment process.
  • Additivity assumption implies no interaction between treatments and units, holding under homogeneity.
  • CRD requires experimental units to be homogeneous; otherwise, blocking is needed.
  • No carryover effects assumed in CRD, suitable for non-sequential experiments.
  • Linearity not directly assumed, but model is linear in parameters for OLS estimation.
  • CRD assumes fixed treatment effects; random effects model alternative uses mixed models.
  • Violation of normality can be checked with Shapiro-Wilk test per treatment.
  • Residual plots in CRD should show random scatter around zero for assumptions hold.
  • CRD requires sufficient replicates (r ≥ 2) to estimate σ² unbiasedly.
  • No outliers assumed; influence diagnostics like Cook's distance used to check.
  • Multicollinearity not an issue in single-factor CRD due to indicator coding.
  • CRD assumes no covariates; if present, use ANCOVA instead.
  • Randomization justifies inference even if strict normality fails (randomization tests).
  • CRD model assumes no time trends or spatial correlations in unit responses.
  • Violation of independence leads to inflated type I error; check Durbin-Watson.
  • CRD requires treatments to be applied without contamination between units.
  • Homoscedasticity tested by plotting residuals vs fitted values in CRD ANOVA.
  • CRD assumes measurable response variable continuous for parametric tests.
  • No missing data assumed; imputation biases estimates if violated.

Assumptions and Requirements Interpretation

The CRD's whole strategy is to whisper a delightful lie about a perfectly tidy, compliant world so we can glean insights from the delightful chaos of our actual data.

Fundamentals

  • In Completely Randomized Design (CRD), treatments are assigned to experimental units entirely at random, ensuring each unit has an equal probability of receiving any treatment, which eliminates systematic bias in assignment.
  • CRD is the simplest type of experimental design, requiring no blocking or stratification, making it suitable for homogeneous experimental units.
  • The degrees of freedom in CRD for treatments is (t-1), where t is the number of treatments, and for error is (N-t), with N total observations.
  • In CRD, the total variability is decomposed as SST = SSTreatments + SSE, where SSTreatments measures between-treatment variation and SSE within-treatment.
  • CRD assumes that the experimental material is homogeneous, so no blocking is needed, simplifying the randomization process.
  • The randomization in CRD is achieved by randomly permuting treatment labels across all N units, often using random number generators.
  • CRD requires a minimum of two treatments and replicates per treatment to estimate error variance reliably.
  • In CRD, the design matrix has one column per treatment indicator, with orthogonal contrasts possible for t treatments.
  • CRD is equivalent to a one-way ANOVA model where Y_ij = μ + τ_i + ε_ij, with ε_ij ~ N(0,σ²).
  • The efficiency of CRD is 100% relative to itself but lower than blocked designs if material is heterogeneous.
  • CRD uses simple random sampling without replacement for assignment when N is finite.
  • In CRD, the expected mean square for treatments is σ² + (n/ t) Σ τ_i², where n is replicates per treatment.
  • CRD randomization distribution is uniform over all possible treatment assignments.
  • For CRD, power calculations use non-central F distribution with non-centrality parameter λ = n Σ τ_i² / σ².
  • CRD is optimal under the Neyman model for minimizing variance of treatment contrasts when variances are equal.
  • In software like R, CRD is implemented via factor() and aov() functions for analysis.
  • CRD layout can be visualized as a single factor with levels repeated r times randomly.
  • Historical origin of CRD traces to R.A. Fisher’s 1920s work at Rothamsted Experimental Station.
  • CRD requires complete data collection on all units without missing values for standard ANOVA.
  • In CRD, the covariance between any two observations from different treatments is zero under randomization.
  • CRD supports multiple comparisons via Tukey HSD or Bonferroni adjustments post-ANOVA.
  • The F-test in CRD tests H0: all τ_i = 0 against Ha: not all equal, with F = MSTr / MSE.
  • CRD sample size determination uses α, power(1-β), σ, and minimum detectable difference δ.
  • In balanced CRD, each treatment has exactly r replicates, maximizing power.
  • Unbalanced CRD uses Type III sums of squares in ANOVA to handle unequal replicates.
  • CRD is robust to mild violations of normality but sensitive to heteroscedasticity.
  • Simulation studies show CRD maintains type I error rate close to α under randomization.
  • CRD extensions include factorial CRD for multiple factors without blocking.
  • CRD is foundational for understanding more complex designs like RCBD.
  • In CRD, the least squares estimator for τ_i is the treatment mean bar{Y}_i.

Fundamentals Interpretation

Completely Randomized Design is the statistical equivalent of drawing names from a hat: it elegantly hands every experimental unit an equal shot at any treatment to ensure fairness, but that beautifully simple act of pure chance only works if your subjects are as indistinguishable as the hats themselves.

Statistical Analysis

  • CRD analysis uses ANOVA F-test: F = (SSTr/(t-1)) / (SSE/(N-t)) ~ F(t-1, N-t).
  • Treatment means compared using LSD test with critical value t_α/2,∞ * sqrt(MSE/r).
  • Confidence interval for τ_i - τ_j is bar{Y}_i - bar{Y}_j ± t_{(N-t),1-α/2} * sqrt(2 MSE / r).
  • In R, CRD analyzed with summary(aov(response ~ treatment, data)).
  • Tukey HSD in CRD: q_α(t, N-t) * sqrt(MSE / r) for pairwise differences.
  • Power of CRD F-test computed as 1 - β = P(F' > F_α | λ), non-central F.
  • Scheffe multiple comparison in CRD uses (t-1) F_α * MSE / r for intervals.
  • Residual analysis: standardized residuals |z| < 3 indicate no anomalies.
  • Effect size in CRD: η² = SSTr / SST, partial η² = SSTr / (SSTr + SSE).
  • Non-parametric alternative to CRD ANOVA is Kruskal-Wallis test.
  • Model diagnostics include Q-Q plots for normality of residuals in CRD.
  • Variance of bar{Y}_i in CRD is σ² / r, estimated by MSE / r.
  • Dunnett test for CRD control vs treatments: critical t from studentized range.
  • Bootstrap confidence intervals for treatment effects in CRD via resampling residuals.
  • Likelihood ratio test for fixed effects in CRD under normality.
  • Randomization tests in CRD: permute labels 9999 times for p-value.
  • REML estimation for σ² in unbalanced CRD mixed models.
  • Box-Cox transformation applied to response if variance stabilizes.
  • Trend analysis in CRD for quantitative treatments using orthogonal polynomials.
  • Simultaneous confidence bands for all contrasts in CRD via Scheffe.
  • Welch ANOVA for heteroscedastic CRD, adjusting df via Welch-Satterthwaite.

Statistical Analysis Interpretation

When your data is neat and well-behaved, the classic CRD toolkit—with its trusty F-test, cautious LSD post-hocs, and vigilant residual checks—offers a satisfyingly precise way to isolate your treatment signal from the noise.