  To help understand why different published analyses of the Super-Kamiokande
solar neutrino data arrive at different conclusions, we have applied six
different methods to a standardized problem. The key difference between the
various methods rests in the amount of information that each processes. A
Lomb-Scargle analysis that uses the mid times of the time bins and ignores
experimental error estimates uses the least information. A likelihood analysis
that uses the start times, end times, and mean live times, and takes account of
the experimental error estimates, makes the greatest use of the available
information. We carry out power-spectrum analyses of the Super-Kamiokande 5-day
solar neutrino data, using each method in turn, for a standard search band (0
to 50 yr-1). For each method, we also carry out a fixed number (10,000) of
Monte-Carlo simulations for the purpose of estimating the significance of the
leading peak in each power spectrum. We find that, with one exception, the
results of these calculations are compatible with those of previously published
analyses. (We are unable to replicate Koshio's recent results.) We find that
the significance of the peaks at 9.43 yr-1 and at 43.72 yr-1 increases
progressively as one incorporates more information into the analysis procedure.
