Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Experimental design›Completely Randomized Design (CRD)
Hypothesis test

Completely Randomized Design (CRD)

Also known as: CRD, completely randomised design, one-way experimental design, Tam Tesadüf Deneme Deseni (CRD)

The completely randomized design is the most fundamental experimental design, in which experimental units are assigned to treatments entirely at random with no restrictions. Analysed by one-way ANOVA, it was formalised by R. A. Fisher in the 1930s and remains the reference starting point for experimental research whenever the experimental material is homogeneous and nuisance variation is absent or negligible.

ScholarGate
  1. Hypothesis test
  2. v1
  3. 2 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Completely Randomized Design
Full Factorial DesignKruskal-Wallis testOne-way ANOVAFractional Factorial Des…Randomized Complete Bloc…Split-Plot Design

When to use it

Use the completely randomized design when experimental units are homogeneous enough that unrestricted random assignment creates comparable groups. The design suits laboratory and controlled-environment studies where extraneous sources of variability are absent. Four assumptions must hold: (1) errors are independent, (2) errors are normally distributed — check with Shapiro-Wilk, (3) error variances are equal across treatments — check with Levene's or Bartlett's test, and (4) the minimum recommended group size is around ten observations per treatment. If the experimental material is heterogeneous, block that variability using a randomized complete block design instead. If normality or variance homogeneity fail, use the Kruskal-Wallis test.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Simplest experimental design — straightforward layout, analysis, and interpretation.
  • Flexible sample sizes: treatments do not need equal replication, though equal groups improve power.
  • Maximum degrees of freedom assigned to the error term compared with blocked designs, which increases statistical power when homogeneity holds.
  • Directly extends to factorial and response-surface designs by adding treatment structure.
Limitations
  • Requires homogeneous experimental material; heterogeneity inflates the error term and reduces sensitivity.
  • No built-in mechanism for blocking or controlling known sources of nuisance variation.
  • The overall F test only signals that some difference exists; post-hoc tests are always needed to pinpoint which pairs differ.
  • Sensitive to outliers and violations of normality in small samples.

Frequently asked

When should I prefer a randomized complete block design over CRD?

When you can identify a source of nuisance variation — such as location in a greenhouse, litter of animals, or day of measurement — that is unrelated to the treatments, grouping experimental units into blocks and using RCBD removes that variability from the error term and increases precision. CRD is appropriate only when no such blocking factor exists or when experimental units are genuinely homogeneous.

Do all treatment groups need the same number of observations?

No. CRD accommodates unequal group sizes, and the ANOVA calculations remain valid. Equal replication per treatment is nonetheless recommended because it maximises statistical power and simplifies post-hoc comparisons.

The overall F is significant — what do I do next?

Run a post-hoc multiple comparison procedure. Tukey's HSD controls the familywise error rate when comparing all pairs and is the most common choice. Bonferroni correction is more conservative but straightforward. Dunnett's test is appropriate when each treatment is compared only against a control. Always report the mean difference, its confidence interval, and an effect size such as eta-squared.

What is the nonparametric alternative?

When normality or variance homogeneity assumptions fail, and especially with small samples (fewer than ten per group), the Kruskal-Wallis test is the rank-based nonparametric equivalent. It tests whether the distributions of the groups are stochastically equal, without assuming a specific distributional form.

Sources

  1. Montgomery, D.C. (2017). Design and Analysis of Experiments. Wiley. ISBN: 978-1119320937
  2. Cochran, W.G. & Cox, G.M. (1957). Experimental Designs. Wiley. link ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 1). Completely Randomized Design (CRD). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/experimental-design/completely-randomized-design

Related methods

Full Factorial DesignKruskal-Wallis testOne-way ANOVA

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Full Factorial DesignExperimental design↔ compare
  • Kruskal-Wallis testStatistics↔ compare
  • One-way ANOVAStatistics↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Fractional Factorial DesignRandomized Complete Block DesignSplit-Plot Design

Similar methods

Randomized Complete Block DesignOne-way ANOVAAnalysis of Variance (ANOVA)Blocked Laboratory ExperimentRandomization InferenceRandomized Controlled TrialFactorial ExperimentRobust ANOVA

Related reference concepts

Randomization and BlockingRandomized Controlled TrialRandomized Controlled TrialStudy Design and Sample Size PlanningDesign of ExperimentsMultivariate Analysis of Variance

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Completely Randomized Design (Completely Randomized Design (CRD)). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/experimental-design/completely-randomized-design · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
R. A. Fisher
Year
1935
Family
Experimental design
Type
Parametric group comparison via one-way ANOVA
Groups
2 or more
Outcome
continuous
Parametric
Yes
Distribution
F
Df
k-1 (treatment), N-k (error)
MinSamplePerGroup
10
Difficulty
1
Related methods
Full Factorial DesignKruskal-Wallis testOne-way ANOVA
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account