a hypothesis which defines the population distribution is called

9.3 Probability Distribution Needed for Hypothesis Testing

Earlier in the course, we discussed sampling distributions. Particular distributions are associated with various types of hypothesis testing.

The following table summarizes various hypothesis tests and corresponding probability distributions that will be used to conduct the test (based on the assumptions shown below):

Assumptions

When you perform a hypothesis test of a single population mean μ using a normal distribution (often called a z-test), you take a simple random sample from the population. The population you are testing is normally distributed , or your sample size is sufficiently large. You know the value of the population standard deviation , which, in reality, is rarely known.

When you perform a hypothesis test of a single population mean μ using a Student's t-distribution (often called a t -test), there are fundamental assumptions that need to be met in order for the test to work properly. Your data should be a simple random sample that comes from a population that is approximately normally distributed. You use the sample standard deviation to approximate the population standard deviation. (Note that if the sample size is sufficiently large, a t -test will work even if the population is not approximately normally distributed).

When you perform a hypothesis test of a single population proportion p , you take a simple random sample from the population. You must meet the conditions for a binomial distribution : there are a certain number n of independent trials, the outcomes of any trial are success or failure, and each trial has the same probability of a success p . The shape of the binomial distribution needs to be similar to the shape of the normal distribution. To ensure this, the quantities np and nq must both be greater than five ( n p > 5   n p > 5   and n q > 5   n q > 5   ). Then the binomial distribution of a sample (estimated) proportion can be approximated by the normal distribution with μ = p   μ = p   and σ = p q n σ = p q n . Remember that q = 1 - p q q = 1 - p q .

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introductory-statistics-2e/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Barbara Illowsky, Susan Dean
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introductory Statistics 2e
• Publication date: Dec 13, 2023
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introductory-statistics-2e/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introductory-statistics-2e/pages/9-3-probability-distribution-needed-for-hypothesis-testing

© Dec 6, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Statistics/Hypothesis Testing

• 1 Introduction
• 2 Basic concepts and terminologies
• 3 Evaluating a hypothesis test
• 4.1 Neyman-Pearson lemma
• 4.2 Likelihood-ratio test
• 5 Relationship between hypothesis testing and confidence intervals

Introduction [ edit | edit source ]

In previous chapters, we have discussed two methods for estimating unknown parameters , namely point estimation and interval estimation . Estimating unknown parameters is an important area in statistical inference, and in this chapter we will discuss another important area, namely hypothesis testing , which is related to decision making . Indeed, the concepts of confidence intervals and hypothesis testing are closely related, as we will demonstrate.

Basic concepts and terminologies [ edit | edit source ]

Before discussing how to conduct hypothesis testing, and evaluate the "goodness" of a hypothesis test, let us introduce some basic concepts and terminologies related to hypothesis testing first.

Definition. (Hypothesis) A (statistical) hypothesis is a statement about population parameter(s).

There are two terms that classify hypotheses:

Definition. (Simple and composite hypothesis) A hypothesis is a simple hypothesis if it completely specifies the distribution of the population (that is, the distribution is completely known, without any unknown parameters involved), and is a composite hypothesis otherwise.

Sometimes, it is not immediately clear that whether a hypothesis is simple or composite. To understand the classification of hypotheses more clearly, let us consider the following example.

• (a) and (b) are simple hypotheses, since they all completely specifies the distribution.

In hypothesis tests, we consider two hypotheses:

Example. Suppose your friend gives you a coin for tossing, and we do not know whether it is fair or not. However, since the coin is given by your friend, you believe that the coin is fair unless there are sufficient evidences suggesting otherwise. What is the null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis in this context (suppose the coin never land on edge)?

• Of course, in some other places, the saying of "accepting null hypothesis" is avoided because of these philosophical issues.

Now, we are facing with two questions. First, what evidences should we consider? Second, what is meant by "sufficient"? For the first question, a natural answer is that we should consider the observed samples , right? This is because we are making hypothesis about the population, and the samples are taken from, and thus closely related to the population, which should help us make the decision.

Let us formally define the terms related to hypothesis testing in the following.

• Graphically, it looks like

• We use the terminology "tail" since the rejection region includes the values that are located at the "extreme portions" (i.e., very left (with small values) or very right (with large values) portions) (called tails) of distributions.

• We sometimes also call upper-tailed and lower-tailed tests as one-sided tests , and two-tailed tests as two-sided tests .

Exercise. What is the type of this hypothesis test?

Right-tailed test.

As we have mentioned, the decisions made by hypothesis test should not be perfect, and errors occur. Indeed, when we think carefully, there are actually two types of errors, as follows:

We can illustrate these two types of errors more clearly using the following table.

• The power function will be our basis in evaluating the goodness of a test or comparing two different tests.

You notice that the type II error of this hypothesis test can be quite large, so you want to revise the test to lower the type II error.

To describe "control the type I error probability at this level" in a more precise way, let us define the following term.

• Intuitively, we choose the maximum probability of type I error to be the size so that the size can tell us how probable type I error occurs in the worst situation , to show that how "well" can the test control the type I error [4] .

Exercise. Calculate the type I error probability and type II error probability when the sample size is 12 (the rejection region remains unchanged).

• Case 3 : The test is two-tailed.

• For case 3 subcase 1 , consider the following diagram:
• For case 3 subcase 2 , consider the following diagram:

Evaluating a hypothesis test [ edit | edit source ]

After discussing some basic concepts and terminologies, let us now study some ways to evaluate goodness of a hypothesis test. As we have previously mentioned, we want the probability of making type I errors and type II errors to be small, but we have mentioned that it is generally impossible to make both probabilities to be arbitrarily small. Hence, we have suggested to control the type I error, using the size of a test, and the "best" test should the one with the smallest probability of making type II error, after controlling the type I error.

These ideas lead us to the following definitions.

Using this definition, instead of saying "best" test (test with the smallest type II error probability), we can say "a test with the most power", or in other words, the "most powerful test".

Constructing a hypothesis test [ edit | edit source ]

Neyman-pearson lemma [ edit | edit source ].

For the case where the underlying distribution is discrete, the proof is very similar (just replace the integrals with sums), and hence omitted.

• In fact, the MP test constructed by Neyman-Pearson lemma is a variant from the likelihood-ratio test , which is more general in the sense that the likelihood-ratio test can also be constructed for composite null and alternative hypotheses, apart from simple null and alternative hypotheses directly. But, the likelihood-ratio test may not be (U)MP. We will discuss likelihood-ratio test later.

• This rejection region has appeared in a previous example.

Now, let us consider another example where the underlying distribution is discrete.

Exercise. Calculate the probability of making type II error for the above test.

Likelihood-ratio test [ edit | edit source ]

Previously, we have suggested using the Neyman-Pearson lemma to construct MPT for testing simple null hypothesis against simple alternative hypothesis. However, when the hypotheses are composite, we may not be able to use the Neyman-Pearson lemma. So, in the following, we will give a general method for constructing tests for any hypotheses, not limited to simple hypotheses. But we should notice that the tests constructed are not necessarily UMPT.

• When the simple and alternative hypotheses are simple, the likelihood ratio test will be the same as the test suggested in the Neyman-Pearson lemma.

Relationship between hypothesis testing and confidence intervals [ edit | edit source ]

We have mentioned that there are similarities between hypothesis testing and confidence intervals. In this section, we will introduce a theorem suggesting how to construct a hypothesis test from a confidence interval (or in general, confidence set ), and vice versa.

• ↑ Thus, a natural measure of "goodness" of a hypothesis test is its "size of errors". We will discuss these later in this chapter.

• Book:Statistics

Navigation menu

Hypothesis Testing Framework

Now that we've seen an example and explored some of the themes for hypothesis testing, let's specify the procedure that we will follow.

Hypothesis Testing Steps

The formal framework and steps for hypothesis testing are as follows:

• Identify and define the parameter of interest
• Define the competing hypotheses to test
• Set the evidence threshold, formally called the significance level
• Generate or use theory to specify the sampling distribution and check conditions
• Calculate the test statistic and p-value
• Evaluate your results and write a conclusion in the context of the problem.

We'll discuss each of these steps below.

Identify Parameter of Interest

First, I like to specify and define the parameter of interest. What is the population that we are interested in? What characteristic are we measuring?

By defining our population of interest, we can confirm that we are truly using sample data. If we find that we actually have population data, our inference procedures are not needed. We could proceed by summarizing our population data.

By identifying and defining the parameter of interest, we can confirm that we use appropriate methods to summarize our variable of interest. We can also focus on the specific process needed for our parameter of interest.

In our example from the last page, the parameter of interest would be the population mean time that a host has been on Airbnb for the population of all Chicago listings on Airbnb in March 2023. We could represent this parameter with the symbol $\mu$. It is best practice to fully define $\mu$ both with words and symbol.

Define the Hypotheses

For hypothesis testing, we need to decide between two competing theories. These theories must be statements about the parameter. Although we won't have the population data to definitively select the correct theory, we will use our sample data to determine how reasonable our "skeptic's theory" is.

The first hypothesis is called the null hypothesis, $H_0$. This can be thought of as the "status quo", the "skeptic's theory", or that nothing is happening.

Examples of null hypotheses include that the population proportion is equal to 0.5 ($p = 0.5$), the population median is equal to 12 ($M = 12$), or the population mean is equal to 14.5 ($\mu = 14.5$).

The second hypothesis is called the alternative hypothesis, $H_a$ or $H_1$. This can be thought of as the "researcher's hypothesis" or that something is happening. This is what we'd like to convince the skeptic to believe. In most cases, the desired outcome of the researcher is to conclude that the alternative hypothesis is reasonable to use moving forward.

Examples of alternative hypotheses include that the population proportion is greater than 0.5 ($p > 0.5$), the population median is less than 12 ($M < 12$), or the population mean is not equal to 14.5 ($\mu \neq 14.5$).

There are a few requirements for the hypotheses:

• the hypotheses must be about the same population parameter,
• the hypotheses must have the same null value (provided number to compare to),
• the null hypothesis must have the equality (the equals sign must be in the null hypothesis),
• the alternative hypothesis must not have the equality (the equals sign cannot be in the alternative hypothesis),
• there must be no overlap between the null and alternative hypothesis.

You may have previously seen null hypotheses that include more than an equality (e.g. $p \le 0.5$). As long as there is an equality in the null hypothesis, this is allowed. For our purposes, we will simplify this statement to ($p = 0.5$).

To summarize from above, possible hypotheses statements are:

$H_0: p = 0.5$ vs. $H_a: p > 0.5$

$H_0: M = 12$ vs. $H_a: M < 12$

$H_0: \mu = 14.5$ vs. $H_a: \mu \neq 14.5$

In our second example about Airbnb hosts, our hypotheses would be:

$H_0: \mu = 2100$ vs. $H_a: \mu > 2100$.

Set Threshold (Significance Level)

There is one more step to complete before looking at the data. This is to set the threshold needed to convince the skeptic. This threshold is defined as an $\alpha$ significance level. We'll define exactly what the $\alpha$ significance level means later. For now, smaller $\alpha$s correspond to more evidence being required to convince the skeptic.

A few common $\alpha$ levels include 0.1, 0.05, and 0.01.

For our Airbnb hosts example, we'll set the threshold as 0.02.

Determine the Sampling Distribution of the Sample Statistic

The first step (as outlined above) is the identify the parameter of interest. What is the best estimate of the parameter of interest? Typically, it will be the sample statistic that corresponds to the parameter. This sample statistic, along with other features of the distribution will prove especially helpful as we continue the hypothesis testing procedure.

However, we do have a decision at this step. We can choose to use simulations with a resampling approach or we can choose to rely on theory if we are using proportions or means. We then also need to confirm that our results and conclusions will be valid based on the available data.

Required Condition

The one required assumption, regardless of approach (resampling or theory), is that the sample is random and representative of the population of interest. In other words, we need our sample to be a reasonable sample of data from the population.

Using Simulations and Resampling

If we'd like to use a resampling approach, we have no (or minimal) additional assumptions to check. This is because we are relying on the available data instead of assumptions.

We do need to adjust our data to be consistent with the null hypothesis (or skeptic's claim). We can then rely on our resampling approach to estimate a plausible sampling distribution for our sample statistic.

Recall that we took this approach on the last page. Before simulating our estimated sampling distribution, we adjusted the mean of the data so that it matched with our skeptic's claim, shown in the code below.

We'll see a few more examples on the next page.

Using Theory

On the other hand, we could rely on theory in order to estimate the sampling distribution of our desired statistic. Recall that we had a few different options to rely on:

• the CLT for the sampling distribution of a sample mean
• the binomial distribution for the sampling distribution of a proportion (or count)
• the Normal approximation of a binomial distribution (using the CLT) for the sampling distribution of a proportion

If relying on the CLT to specify the underlying sampling distribution, you also need to confirm:

• having a random sample and
• having a sample size that is less than 10% of the population size if the sampling is done without replacement
• having a Normally distributed population for a quantitative variable OR
• having a large enough sample size (usually at least 25) for a quantitative variable
• having a large enough sample size for a categorical variable (defined by $np$ and $n(1-p)$ being at least 10)

If relying on the binomial distribution to specify the underlying sampling distribution, you need to confirm:

• having a set number of trials, $n$
• having the same probability of success, $p$ for each observation

After determining the appropriate theory to use, we should check our conditions and then specify the sampling distribution for our statistic.

For the Airbnb hosts example, we have what we've assumed to be a random sample. It is not taken with replacement, so we also need to assume that our sample size (700) is less than 10% of our population size. In other words, we need to assume that the population of Chicago Airbnbs in March 2023 was at least 7000. Since we do have our (presumed) population data available, we can confirm that there were at least 7000 Chicago Airbnbs in the population in 2023.

Additionally, we can confirm that normality of the sampling distribution applies for the CLT to apply. Our sample size is more than 25 and the parameter of interest is a mean, so this meets our necessary criteria for the normality condition to be valid.

With the conditions now met, we can estimate our sampling distribution. From the CLT, we know that the distribution for the sample mean should be $\bar{X} \sim N(\mu, \frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}})$.

Now, we face our next challenge -- what to plug in as the mean and standard error for this distribution. Since we are adopting the skeptic's point of view for the purpose of this approach, we can plug in the value of $\mu_0 = 2100$. We also know that the sample size $n$ is 700. But what should we plug in for the population standard deviation $\sigma$?

When we don't know the value of a parameter, we will generally plug in our best estimate for the parameter. In this case, that corresponds to plugging in $\hat{\sigma}$, or our sample standard deviation.

Now, our estimated sampling distribution based on the CLT is: $\bar{X} \sim N(2100, 41.4045)$.

If we compare to our corresponding skeptic's sampling distribution on the last page, we can confirm that the theoretical sampling distribution is similar to the simulated sampling distribution based on resampling.

Assumptions not met

What do we do if the necessary conditions aren't met for the sampling distribution? Because the simulation-based resampling approach has minimal assumptions, we should be able to use this approach to produce valid results as long as the provided data is representative of the population.

The theory-based approach has more conditions, and we may not be able to meet all of the necessary conditions. For example, if our parameter is something other than a mean or proportion, we may not have appropriate theory. Additionally, we may not have a large enough sample size.

• First, we could consider changing approaches to the simulation-based one.
• Second, we might look at how we could meet the necessary conditions better. In some cases, we may be able to redefine groups or make adjustments so that the setup of the test is closer to what is needed.
• As a last resort, we may be able to continue following the hypothesis testing steps. In this case, your calculations may not be valid or exact; however, you might be able to use them as an estimate or an approximation. It would be crucial to specify the violation and approximation in any conclusions or discussion of the test.

Calculate the evidence with statistics and p-values

Now, it's time to calculate how much evidence the sample contains to convince the skeptic to change their mind. As we saw above, we can convince the skeptic to change their mind by demonstrating that our sample is unlikely to occur if their theory is correct.

How do we do this? We do this by calculating a probability associated with our observed value for the statistic.

For example, for our situation, we want to convince the skeptic that the population mean is actually greater than 2100 days. We do that by calculating the probability that a sample mean would be as large or larger than what we observed in our actual sample, which was 2188 days. Why do we need the larger portion? We use the larger portion because a sample mean of 2200 days also provides evidence that the population mean is larger than 2100 days; it isn't limited to exactly what we observed in our sample. We call this specific probability the p-value.

That is, the p-value is the probability of observing a test statistic as extreme or more extreme (as determined by the alternative hypothesis), assuming the null hypothesis is true.

Our observed p-value for the Airbnb host example demonstrates that the probability of getting a sample mean host time of 2188 days (the value from our sample) or more is 1.46%, assuming that the true population mean is 2100 days.

Test statistic

Notice that the formal definition of a p-value mentions a test statistic . In most cases, this word can be replaced with "statistic" or "sample" for an equivalent statement.

Oftentimes, we'll see that our sample statistic can be used directly as the test statistic, as it was above. We could equivalently adjust our statistic to calculate a test statistic. This test statistic is often calculated as:

$\text{test statistic} = \frac{\text{estimate} - \text{hypothesized value}}{\text{standard error of estimate}}$

P-value Calculation Options

Note also that the p-value definition includes a probability associated with a test statistic being as extreme or more extreme (as determined by the alternative hypothesis . How do we determine the area that we consider when calculating the probability. This decision is determined by the inequality in the alternative hypothesis.

For example, when we were trying to convince the skeptic that the population mean is greater than 2100 days, we only considered those sample means that we at least as large as what we observed -- 2188 days or more.

If instead we were trying to convince the skeptic that the population mean is less than 2100 days ($H_a: \mu < 2100$), we would consider all sample means that were at most what we observed - 2188 days or less. In this case, our p-value would be quite large; it would be around 99.5%. This large p-value demonstrates that our sample does not support the alternative hypothesis. In fact, our sample would encourage us to choose the null hypothesis instead of the alternative hypothesis of $\mu < 2100$, as our sample directly contradicts the statement in the alternative hypothesis.

If we wanted to convince the skeptic that they were wrong and that the population mean is anything other than 2100 days ($H_a: \mu \neq 2100$), then we would want to calculate the probability that a sample mean is at least 88 days away from 2100 days. That is, we would calculate the probability corresponding to 2188 days or more or 2012 days or less. In this case, our p-value would be roughly twice the previously calculated p-value.

We could calculate all of those probabilities using our sampling distributions, either simulated or theoretical, that we generated in the previous step. If we chose to calculate a test statistic as defined in the previous section, we could also rely on standard normal distributions to calculate our p-value.

Evaluate your results and write conclusion in context of problem

Once you've gathered your evidence, it's now time to make your final conclusions and determine how you might proceed.

In traditional hypothesis testing, you often make a decision. Recall that you have your threshold (significance level $\alpha$) and your level of evidence (p-value). We can compare the two to determine if your p-value is less than or equal to your threshold. If it is, you have enough evidence to persuade your skeptic to change their mind. If it is larger than the threshold, you don't have quite enough evidence to convince the skeptic.

Common formal conclusions (if given in context) would be:

• I have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis (the skeptic's claim), and I have sufficient evidence to suggest that the alternative hypothesis is instead true.
• I do not have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis (the skeptic's claim), and so I do not have sufficient evidence to suggest the alternative hypothesis is true.

The only decision that we can make is to either reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis (we cannot "accept" the null hypothesis). Because we aren't actively evaluating the alternative hypothesis, we don't want to make definitive decisions based on that hypothesis. However, when it comes to making our conclusion for what to use going forward, we frame this on whether we could successfully convince someone of the alternative hypothesis.

A less formal conclusion might look something like:

Based on our sample of Chicago Airbnb listings, it seems as if the mean time since a host has been on Airbnb (for all Chicago Airbnb listings) is more than 5.75 years.

Significance Level Interpretation

We've now seen how the significance level $\alpha$ is used as a threshold for hypothesis testing. What exactly is the significance level?

The significance level $\alpha$ has two primary definitions. One is that the significance level is the maximum probability required to reject the null hypothesis; this is based on how the significance level functions within the hypothesis testing framework. The second definition is that this is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is true; in other words, this is the probability of making a specific type of error called a Type I error.

Why do we have to be comfortable making a Type I error? There is always a chance that the skeptic was originally correct and we obtained a very unusual sample. We don't want to the skeptic to be so convinced of their theory that no evidence can convince them. In this case, we need the skeptic to be convinced as long as the evidence is strong enough . Typically, the probability threshold will be low, to reduce the number of errors made. This also means that a decent amount of evidence will be needed to convince the skeptic to abandon their position in favor of the alternative theory.

p-value Limitations and Misconceptions

In comparison to the $\alpha$ significance level, we also need to calculate the evidence against the null hypothesis with the p-value.

The p-value is the probability of getting a test statistic as extreme or more extreme (in the direction of the alternative hypothesis), assuming the null hypothesis is true.

Recently, p-values have gotten some bad press in terms of how they are used. However, that doesn't mean that p-values should be abandoned, as they still provide some helpful information. Below, we'll describe what p-values don't mean, and how they should or shouldn't be used to make decisions.

Factors that affect a p-value

What features affect the size of a p-value?

• the null value, or the value assumed under the null hypothesis
• the effect size (the difference between the null value under the null hypothesis and the true value of the parameter)
• the sample size

More evidence against the null hypothesis will be obtained if the effect size is larger and if the sample size is larger.

Misconceptions

We gave a definition for p-values above. What are some examples that p-values don't mean?

• A p-value is not the probability that the null hypothesis is correct
• A p-value is not the probability that the null hypothesis is incorrect
• A p-value is not the probability of getting your specific sample
• A p-value is not the probability that the alternative hypothesis is correct
• A p-value is not the probability that the alternative hypothesis is incorrect
• A p-value does not indicate the size of the effect

Our p-value is a way of measuring the evidence that your sample provides against the null hypothesis, assuming the null hypothesis is in fact correct.

Using the p-value to make a decision

Why is there bad press for a p-value? You may have heard about the standard $\alpha$ level of 0.05. That is, we would be comfortable with rejecting the null hypothesis once in 20 attempts when the null hypothesis is really true. Recall that we reject the null hypothesis when the p-value is less than or equal to the significance level.

Consider what would happen if you have two different p-values: 0.049 and 0.051.

In essence, these two p-values represent two very similar probabilities (4.9% vs. 5.1%) and very similar levels of evidence against the null hypothesis. However, when we make our decision based on our threshold, we would make two different decisions (reject and fail to reject, respectively). Should this decision really be so simplistic? I would argue that the difference shouldn't be so severe when the sample statistics are likely very similar. For this reason, I (and many other experts) strongly recommend using the p-value as a measure of evidence and including it with your conclusion.

Putting too much emphasis on the decision (and having a significant result) has created a culture of misusing p-values. For this reason, understanding your p-value itself is crucial.

Searching for p-values

The other concern with setting a definitive threshold of 0.05 is that some researchers will begin performing multiple tests until finding a p-value that is small enough. However, with a p-value of 0.05, we know that we will have a p-value less than 0.05 1 time out of every 20 times, even when the null hypothesis is true.

This means that if researchers start hunting for p-values that are small (sometimes called p-hacking), then they are likely to identify a small p-value every once in a while by chance alone. Researchers might then publish that result, even though the result is actually not informative. For this reason, it is recommended that researchers write a definitive analysis plan to prevent performing multiple tests in search of a result that occurs by chance alone.

Best Practices

With all of this in mind, what should we do when we have our p-value? How can we prevent or reduce misuse of a p-value?

• Report the p-value along with the conclusion
• Specify the effect size (the value of the statistic)
• Define an analysis plan before looking at the data
• Interpret the p-value clearly to specify what it indicates
• Consider using an alternate statistical approach, the confidence interval, discussed next, when appropriate

Definition: Simple and composite hypothesis

Definition: Let $H$ be a statistical hypothesis . Then,

$H$ is called a simple hypothesis, if it completely specifies the population distribution; in this case, the sampling distribution of the test statistic is a function of sample size alone.

$H$ is called a composite hypothesis, if it does not completely specify the population distribution; for example, the hypothesis may only specify one parameter of the distribution and leave others unspecified.

• Wikipedia (2021): "Exclusion of the null hypothesis" ; in: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia , retrieved on 2021-03-19 ; URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusion_of_the_null_hypothesis#Terminology .

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

10.4: Distribution Needed for Hypothesis Testing

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 126826

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Earlier in the course, we discussed sampling distributions. Particular distributions are associated with hypothesis testing. Perform tests of a population mean using a normal distribution or a Student's \(t\)-distribution . (Remember, use a Student's \(t\)-distribution when the population standard deviation is unknown and the distribution of the sample mean is approximately normal.) We perform tests of a population proportion using a normal distribution (usually \(n\) is large or the sample size is large).

If you are testing a single population mean, the distribution for the test is for means :

\[\bar{X} - N\left(\mu_{x}, \frac{\sigma_{x}}{\sqrt{n}}\right)\]

The population parameter is \(\mu\). The estimated value (point estimate) for \(\mu\) is \(\bar{x}\), the sample mean.

If you are testing a single population proportion, the distribution for the test is for proportions or percentages:

\[ \hat{p} - N\left(p, \sqrt{\frac{p-q}{n}}\right)\]

The population parameter is \(p\). The estimated value (point estimate) for \(p\) is \( \hat{p} \). \( \hat{p} = \frac{x}{n}\) where \(x\) is the number of successes and n is the sample size.

Assumptions

When you perform a hypothesis test of a single population mean \(\mu\) using a Student's \(t\)-distribution (often called a \(t\)-test), there are fundamental assumptions that need to be met in order for the test to work properly. Your data should be a simple random sample that comes from a population that is approximately normally distributed. You use the sample standard deviation to approximate the population standard deviation. (Note that if the sample size is sufficiently large, a \(t\)-test will work even if the population is not approximately normally distributed).

When you perform a hypothesis test of a single population mean \(\mu\) using a normal distribution (often called a \(z\)-test), you take a simple random sample from the population. The population you are testing is normally distributed or your sample size is sufficiently large. You know the value of the population standard deviation which, in reality, is rarely known.

When you perform a hypothesis test of a single population proportion \(p\), you take a simple random sample from the population. You must meet the conditions for a binomial distribution which are: there are a certain number \(n\) of independent trials, the outcomes of any trial are success or failure, and each trial has the same probability of a success \(p\). The shape of the binomial distribution needs to be similar to the shape of the normal distribution. To ensure this, the quantities \(np\) and \(nq\) must both be greater than five \((np > 5\) and \(nq > 5)\). Then the binomial distribution of a sample (estimated) proportion can be approximated by the normal distribution with \(\mu = p\) and \(\sigma = \sqrt{\frac{pq}{n}}\). Remember that \(q = 1 – p\).

In order for a hypothesis test’s results to be generalized to a population, certain requirements must be satisfied.

When testing for a single population mean:

• A Student's \(t\)-test should be used if the data come from a simple, random sample and the population is approximately normally distributed, or the sample size is large, with an unknown standard deviation.
• The normal test will work if the data come from a simple, random sample and the population is approximately normally distributed, or the sample size is large, with a known standard deviation.

When testing a single population proportion use a normal test for a single population proportion if the data comes from a simple, random sample, fill the requirements for a binomial distribution, and the mean number of success and the mean number of failures satisfy the conditions: \(np > 5\) and \(nq > n\) where \(n\) is the sample size, \(p\) is the probability of a success, and \(q\) is the probability of a failure.

Formula Review

If there is no given preconceived \(\alpha\), then use \(\alpha = 0.05\).

Types of Hypothesis Tests

• Single population mean, known population variance (or standard deviation): Normal test .
• Single population mean, unknown population variance (or standard deviation): Student's \(t\)-test .
• Single population proportion: Normal test .
• For a single population mean , we may use a normal distribution with the following mean and standard deviation. Means: \(\mu = \mu_{\bar{x}}\) and \(\\sigma_{\bar{x}} = \frac{\sigma_{x}}{\sqrt{n}}\)
• A single population proportion , we may use a normal distribution with the following mean and standard deviation. Proportions: \(\mu = p\) and \(\sigma = \sqrt{\frac{pq}{n}}\).
• It is continuous and assumes any real values.
• The pdf is symmetrical about its mean of zero. However, it is more spread out and flatter at the apex than the normal distribution.
• It approaches the standard normal distribution as \(n\) gets larger.
• There is a "family" of \(t\)-distributions: every representative of the family is completely defined by the number of degrees of freedom which is one less than the number of data items.

Contributors

Barbara Illowsky and Susan Dean (De Anza College) with many other contributing authors. Content produced by OpenStax College is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 license. Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected] .

Chapter 10: Inference for Means

Hypothesis test for a population mean (1 of 5), learning objectives.

• Recognize when to use a hypothesis test or a confidence interval to draw a conclusion about a population mean.
• Under appropriate conditions, conduct a hypothesis test about a population mean. State a conclusion in context.

Introduction

In Inference for Means , our focus is on inference when the variable is quantitative, so the parameters and statistics are means. In “Estimating a Population Mean,” we learned how to use a sample mean to calculate a confidence interval. The confidence interval estimates a population mean. In “Hypothesis Test for a Population Mean,” we learn to use a sample mean to test a hypothesis about a population mean.

We did hypothesis tests in earlier modules. In Inference for One Proportion , each claim involved a single population proportion. In Inference for Two Proportions , the claim was a statement about a treatment effect or a difference in population proportions. In “Hypothesis Test for a Population Mean,” the claims are statements about a population mean. But we will see that the steps and the logic of the hypothesis test are the same. Before we get into the details, let’s practice identifying research questions and studies that involve a population mean.

Learn By Doing

Cell phone data.

Cell phones and cell phone plans can be very expensive, so consumers must think carefully when choosing a cell phone and service. This decision is as much about choosing the right cellular company as it is about choosing the right phone. Many people use the data/Internet capabilities of a phone as much as, if not more than, they use voice capability. The data service of a cell company is therefore an important factor in this decision. In the following example, a student named Melanie from Los Angeles applies what she learned in her statistics class to help her make a decision about buying a data plan for her smartphone.

Melanie read an advertisement from the Cell Phone Giants (CPG, for short, and yes, we’re using a fictitious company name) that she thinks is too good to be true. The CPG ad states that customers in Los Angeles get average data download speeds of 4 Mbps. With this speed, the ad claims, it takes, on average, only 12 seconds to download a typical 3-minute song from iTunes.

Only 12 seconds on average to download a 3-minute song from iTunes! Melanie has her doubts about this claim, so she gathers data to test it. She asks a friend who uses the CPG plan to download a song, and it takes 13 seconds to download a 3-minute song using the CPG network. Melanie decides to gather more evidence. She uses her friend’s phone and times the download of the same 3-minute song from various locations in Los Angeles. She gets a mean download time of 13.5 seconds for her sample of downloads.

What can Melanie conclude? Her sample has a mean download time that is greater than 12 seconds. Isn’t this evidence that the CPG claim is wrong? Why is a hypothesis test necessary? Isn’t the conclusion clear?

Let’s review the reason Melanie needs to do a hypothesis test before she can reach a conclusion.

Why should Melanie do a hypothesis test?

Melanie’s data (with a mean of 13.5 seconds) suggest that the average download time overall is greater than the 12 seconds claimed by the manufacturer. But wait. We know that samples will vary. If the CPG claim is correct, we don’t expect all samples to have a mean download time exactly equal to 12 seconds. There will be variability in the sample means. But if the overall average download time is 12 seconds, how much variability in sample means do we expect to see? We need to determine if the difference Melanie observed can be explained by chance.

We have to judge Melanie’s data against random samples that come from a population with a mean of 12. For this reason, we must do a simulation or use a mathematical model to examine the sampling distribution of sample means. Based on the sampling distribution, we ask, Is it likely that the samples will have mean download times that are greater than 13.5 seconds if the overall mean is 12 seconds? This probability (the P-value) determines whether Melanie’s data provides convincing evidence against the CPG claim.

Now let’s do the hypothesis test.

Step 1: Determine the hypotheses.

As always, hypotheses come from the research question. The null hypothesis is a hypothesis that the population mean equals a specific value. The alternative hypothesis reflects our claim. The alternative hypothesis says the population mean is “greater than” or “less than” or “not equal to” the value we assume is true in the null hypothesis.

Melanie’s hypotheses:

• H 0 : It takes 12 seconds on average to download Melanie’s song from iTunes with the CPG network in Los Angeles.
• H a : It takes more than 12 seconds on average to download Melanie’s song from iTunes using the CPG network in Los Angeles.

We can write the hypotheses in terms of µ. When we do so, we should always define µ. Here μ = the average number of seconds it takes to download Melanie’s song on the CPG network in Los Angeles.

• H 0 : μ = 12
• H a : μ > 12

Step 2: Collect the data.

To conduct a hypothesis test, Melanie knows she has to use a t-model of the sampling distribution. She thinks ahead to the conditions required, which helps her collect a useful sample.

Recall the conditions for use of a t-model.

• There is no reason to think the download times are normally distributed (they might be, but this isn’t something Melanie could know for sure). So the sample has to be large (more than 30).
• The sample has to be random. Melanie decides to use one phone but randomly selects days, times, and locations in Los Angeles.

Melanie collects a random sample of 45 downloads by using her friend’s phone to download her song from iTunes according to the randomly selected days, times, and locations.

Melanie’s sample of size 45 downloads has an average download time of 13.5 seconds. The standard deviation for the sample is 3.2 seconds. Now Melanie needs to determine how unlikely this data is if CPG’s claim is actually true.

Step 3: Assess the evidence.

Assuming the average download time for Melanie’s song is really 12 seconds, what is the probability that 45 random downloads of this song will have a mean of 13.5 seconds or more?

This is a question about sampling variability. Melanie must determine the standard error. She knows the standard error of random sample means is [latex]\sigma \text{}/\sqrt{n}[/latex]. Since she has no way of knowing the population standard deviation, σ, Melanie uses the sample standard deviation, s = 3.2, as an approximation. Therefore, Melanie approximates the standard error of all sample means ( n = 45) to be

[latex]s\text{}/\sqrt{n}\text{}=\text{}3.2\text{}/\sqrt{45}\text{}=\text{}0.48[/latex]

Now she can assess how far away her sample is from the claimed mean in terms of standard errors. That is, she can compute the t-score of her sample mean.

[latex]T\text{}=\text{}\frac{\mathrm{statistic}-\mathrm{parameter}}{\mathrm{standard}\text{}\mathrm{error}}\text{}=\text{}\frac{\stackrel{¯}{x}-μ}{s\text{}/\sqrt{n}}\text{}=\text{}\frac{13.5-12}{0.48}\text{}=\text{}3.14[/latex]

The sample mean for Melanie’s random sample is approximately 3.14 standard errors above the overall mean of 12. We know from previous experience that a sample mean this far above µ is very unlikely. With a t-score this large, the P-value is very small. We use a simulation of the t-model for 44 degrees of freedom to verify this.

We want the probability that the sample mean is greater than 13.5. This corresponds to the probability that T is greater than 3.14. The P-value is 0.0015.

Step 4: State a conclusion.

Here the logic is the same as for other hypothesis tests. We use the P-value to make a decision. The P-value helps us determine if the difference we see between the data and the hypothesized value of µ is statistically significant or due to chance. One of two outcomes can occur:

• One possibility is that results similar to the actual sample are extremely unlikely. This means the data does not fit with results from random samples selected from the population described by the null hypothesis. In this case, it is unlikely that the data came from this population. The probability as measured by the P-value is small, so we view this as strong evidence against the null hypothesis. We reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis.
• The other possibility is that results similar to the actual sample are fairly likely (not unusual). This means the data fits with typical results from random samples selected from the population described by the null hypothesis. The probability as measured by the P-value is large. In this case, we do not have evidence against the null hypothesis, so we cannot reject it in favor of the alternative hypothesis.

Melanie’s data is very unlikely if µ = 12. The probability is essentially zero (P-value = 0.0015). This means we will rarely see sample means greater than 13.5 if µ = 12. So we reject the null and accept the alternative hypothesis. In other words, this sample provides strong evidence that CPG has overstated the speed of its data download capability.

The following activities give you an opportunity to practice parts of the hypothesis testing process for a population mean. Later you will have the opportunity to practice the hypothesis test from start to finish.

For the following scenarios, give the null and alternative hypotheses and state in words what µ represents in your hypotheses. A good definition of µ describes both the variable and the population.

In the previous example, Melanie did not state a significance level for her test. If she had, the logic is the same as we used for hypothesis tests in Modules 8 and 9. To come to a conclusion about H 0 , we compare the P-value to the significance level α.

• If P ≤ α, we reject H 0 . We conclude there is significant evidence in favor of H a .
• If P > α, we fail to reject H 0 . We conclude the sample does not provide significant evidence in favor of H a .

Use this simulation when needed to answer questions below.

• Concepts in Statistics. Provided by : Open Learning Initiative. Located at : http://oli.cmu.edu . License : CC BY: Attribution

Privacy Policy

Ask any question and you be sure find your answer ? Ask Now

1. A hypothesis which defines the population distribution is called? a Null Hypothesis b Statistical Hypothesis c Simple Hypothesis d Composite Hypothesis

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

10.26: Hypothesis Test for a Population Mean (5 of 5)

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 14164

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

• Interpret the P-value as a conditional probability.

We finish our discussion of the hypothesis test for a population mean with a review of the meaning of the P-value, along with a review of type I and type II errors.

Review of the Meaning of the P-value

At this point, we assume you know how to use a P-value to make a decision in a hypothesis test. The logic is always the same. If we pick a level of significance (α), then we compare the P-value to α.

• If the P-value ≤ α, reject the null hypothesis. The data supports the alternative hypothesis.
• If the P-value > α, do not reject the null hypothesis. The data is not strong enough to support the alternative hypothesis.

In fact, we find that we treat these as “rules” and apply them without thinking about what the P-value means. So let’s pause here and review the meaning of the P-value, since it is the connection between probability and decision-making in inference.

Birth Weights in a Town

Let’s return to the familiar context of birth weights for babies in a town. Suppose that babies in the town had a mean birth weight of 3,500 grams in 2010. This year, a random sample of 50 babies has a mean weight of about 3,400 grams with a standard deviation of about 500 grams. Here is the distribution of birth weights in the sample.

Obviously, this sample weighs less on average than the population of babies in the town in 2010. A decrease in the town’s mean birth weight could indicate a decline in overall health of the town. But does this sample give strong evidence that the town’s mean birth weight is less than 3,500 grams this year?

We now know how to answer this question with a hypothesis test. Let’s use a significance level of 5%.

Let μ = mean birth weight in the town this year. The null hypothesis says there is “no change from 2010.”

• H 0 : μ < 3,500
• H a : μ = 3,500

Since the sample is large, we can conduct the T-test (without worrying about the shape of the distribution of birth weights for individual babies.)

Statistical software tells us the P-value is 0.082 = 8.2%. Since the P-value is greater than 0.05, we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Our conclusion: This sample does not suggest that the mean birth weight this year is less than 3,500 grams ( P -value = 0.082). The sample from this year has a mean of 3,400 grams, which is 100 grams lower than the mean in 2010. But this difference is not statistically significant. It can be explained by the chance fluctuation we expect to see in random sampling.

What Does the P-Value of 0.082 Tell Us?

A simulation can help us understand the P-value. In a simulation, we assume that the population mean is 3,500 grams. This is the null hypothesis. We assume the null hypothesis is true and select 1,000 random samples from a population with a mean of 3,500 grams. The mean of the sampling distribution is at 3,500 (as predicted by the null hypothesis.) We see this in the simulated sampling distribution.

In the simulation, we can see that about 8.6% of the samples have a mean less than 3,400. Since probability is the relative frequency of an event in the long run, we say there is an 8.6% chance that a random sample of 500 babies has a mean less than 3,400 if the population mean is 3,500. We can see that the corresponding area to the left of T = −1.41 in the T-model (with df = 49) also gives us a good estimate of the probability. This area is the P-value, about 8.2%.

If we generalize this statement, we say the P-value is the probability that random samples have results more extreme than the data if the null hypothesis is true. (By more extreme, we mean further from value of the parameter, in the direction of the alternative hypothesis.) We can also describe the P-value in terms of T-scores. The P-value is the probability that the test statistic from a random sample has a value more extreme than that associated with the data if the null hypothesis is true.

What Does a P-Value Mean?

Do women who smoke run the risk of shorter pregnancy and premature birth? The mean pregnancy length is 266 days. We test the following hypotheses.

• H 0 : μ = 266
• H a : μ < 266

Suppose a random sample of 40 women who smoke during their pregnancy have a mean pregnancy length of 260 days with a standard deviation of 21 days. The P-value is 0.04.

What probability does the P-value of 0.04 describe? Label each of the following interpretations as valid or invalid.

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...sessments/3654

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...sessments/3655

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...sessments/3656

Review of Type I and Type II Errors

We know that statistical inference is based on probability, so there is always some chance of making a wrong decision. Recall that there are two types of wrong decisions that can be made in hypothesis testing. When we reject a null hypothesis that is true, we commit a type I error. When we fail to reject a null hypothesis that is false, we commit a type II error.

The following table summarizes the logic behind type I and type II errors.

It is possible to have some influence over the likelihoods of committing these errors. But decreasing the chance of a type I error increases the chance of a type II error. We have to decide which error is more serious for a given situation. Sometimes a type I error is more serious. Other times a type II error is more serious. Sometimes neither is serious.

Recall that if the null hypothesis is true, the probability of committing a type I error is α. Why is this? Well, when we choose a level of significance (α), we are choosing a benchmark for rejecting the null hypothesis. If the null hypothesis is true, then the probability that we will reject a true null hypothesis is α. So the smaller α is, the smaller the probability of a type I error.

It is more complicated to calculate the probability of a type II error. The best way to reduce the probability of a type II error is to increase the sample size. But once the sample size is set, larger values of α will decrease the probability of a type II error (while increasing the probability of a type I error).

General Guidelines for Choosing a Level of Significance

• If the consequences of a type I error are more serious, choose a small level of significance (α).
• If the consequences of a type II error are more serious, choose a larger level of significance (α). But remember that the level of significance is the probability of committing a type I error.
• In general, we pick the largest level of significance that we can tolerate as the chance of a type I error.

Let’s return to the investigation of the impact of smoking on pregnancy length.

Recap of the hypothesis test: The mean human pregnancy length is 266 days. We test the following hypotheses.

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...sessments/3778

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...sessments/3779

https://assessments.lumenlearning.co...sessments/3780

Let’s Summarize

In this “Hypothesis Test for a Population Mean,” we looked at the four steps of a hypothesis test as they relate to a claim about a population mean.

Step 1: Determine the hypotheses.

• The hypotheses are claims about the population mean, µ.
• The null hypothesis is a hypothesis that the mean equals a specific value, µ 0 .

Step 2: Collect the data.

Since the hypothesis test is based on probability, random selection or assignment is essential in data production. Additionally, we need to check whether the t-model is a good fit for the sampling distribution of sample means. To use the t-model, the variable must be normally distributed in the population or the sample size must be more than 30. In practice, it is often impossible to verify that the variable is normally distributed in the population. If this is the case and the sample size is not more than 30, researchers often use the t-model if the sample is not strongly skewed and does not have outliers.

Step 3: Assess the evidence.

• If a t-model is appropriate, determine the t-test statistic for the data’s sample mean.
• Use the test statistic, together with the alternative hypothesis, to determine the P-value.
• The P-value is the probability of finding a random sample with a mean at least as extreme as our sample mean, assuming that the null hypothesis is true.
• As in all hypothesis tests, if the alternative hypothesis is greater than, the P-value is the area to the right of the test statistic. If the alternative hypothesis is less than, the P-value is the area to the left of the test statistic. If the alternative hypothesis is not equal to, the P-value is equal to double the tail area beyond the test statistic.

Step 4: Give the conclusion.

The logic of the hypothesis test is always the same. To state a conclusion about H 0 , we compare the P-value to the significance level, α.

• If P ≤ α, we reject H 0 . We conclude there is significant evidence in favor of H a .
• If P > α, we fail to reject H 0 . We conclude the sample does not provide significant evidence in favor of H a .
• We write the conclusion in the context of the research question. Our conclusion is usually a statement about the alternative hypothesis (we accept H a or fail to acceptH a ) and should include the P-value.

Other Hypothesis Testing Notes

• Remember that the P-value is the probability of seeing a sample mean at least as extreme as the one from the data if the null hypothesis is true. The probability is about the random sample; it is not a “chance” statement about the null or alternative hypothesis.
• If our test results in rejecting a null hypothesis that is actually true, then it is called a type I error.
• If our test results in failing to reject a null hypothesis that is actually false, then it is called a type II error.
• If rejecting a null hypothesis would be very expensive, controversial, or dangerous, then we really want to avoid a type I error. In this case, we would set a strict significance level (a small value of α, such as 0.01).
• Finally, remember the phrase “garbage in, garbage out.” If the data collection methods are poor, then the results of a hypothesis test are meaningless.

Contributors and Attributions

• Concepts in Statistics. Provided by : Open Learning Initiative. Located at : http://oli.cmu.edu . License : CC BY: Attribution