Friedman test is not the extension of Wilcoxon test, so when you have only 2 related samples it is not the same as Wilcoxon signed rank test. The latter ranks and then accounts for the magnitude of differences within a case, whereas Friedman only ranks within a case: it is less sensitive.

Friedman is actually almost the extension of sign test. With 2 samples, their p-values are very close, with Friedman being just slightly more conservative (these two tests treat ties in somewhat different ways). This small difference quickly vanishes as the sample size grows. So, for two related samples these two tests are really peer alternatives.

The test which is equivalent to Wilcoxon - in the same sense as Friedman to sign - is not very well known Quade test, mentioned for example here: http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/software/dataplot/refman1/auxillar/friedman.htm.

Friedman test is not the extension of Wilcoxon test, so when you have only 2 related samples it is not the same as Wilcoxon signed rank test. The latter accounts for the magnitude of difference within a case (and then ranks it across cases), whereas Friedman only ranks within a case (and never across cases): it is less sensitive.

Friedman is actually almost the extension of sign test. With 2 samples, their p-values are very close, with Friedman being just slightly more conservative (these two tests treat ties in somewhat different ways). This small difference quickly vanishes as the sample size grows. So, for two related samples these two tests are really peer alternatives.

The test which is equivalent to Wilcoxon - in the same sense as Friedman to sign - is not very well known Quade test, mentioned for example here: http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/software/dataplot/refman1/auxillar/friedman.htm.

Friedman test is not the extension of Wilcoxon test, so when you have only 2 related samples it is not the same as Wilcoxon signed rank test. The latter ranks and then accounts for the magnitude of differences within a case, whereas Friedman only ranks within a case: it is less sensitive.

Friedman is actually almost the extension of sign test. With 2 samples, their p-values are very close, with Friedman being just slightly more conservative. This small difference quickly vanishes as the sample size grows. So, for two related samples these two tests are really peer alternatives.

The test which is equivalent to Wilcoxon - in the same sense as Friedman to sign - is not very well known Quade test, mentioned for example here: http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/software/dataplot/refman1/auxillar/friedman.htm.

Friedman test is not the extension of Wilcoxon test, so when you have only 2 related samples it is not the same as Wilcoxon signed rank test. The latter ranks and then accounts for the magnitude of differences within a case, whereas Friedman only ranks within a case: it is less sensitive.

Friedman is actually almost the extension of sign test. With 2 samples, their p-values are very close, with Friedman being just slightly more conservative (these two tests treat ties in somewhat different ways). This small difference quickly vanishes as the sample size grows. So, for two related samples these two tests are really peer alternatives.

The test which is equivalent to Wilcoxon - in the same sense as Friedman to sign - is not very well known Quade test, mentioned for example here: http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/software/dataplot/refman1/auxillar/friedman.htm.