INTRODUCTION TO HYPOTHESIS TESTING. Unit 4A - Statistical Inference Part 1

Similar documents
Chapter 20 Testing Hypotheses for Proportions

Introduction to Inference

About Type I and Type II Errors: Examples

Introductory Statistics Day 25. Paired Means Test

Module 02 Lecture - 10 Inferential Statistics Single Sample Tests

Types of Error Power of a Hypothesis Test. AP Statistics - Chapter 21

Introduction to Statistical Hypothesis Testing Prof. Arun K Tangirala Department of Chemical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras

Social Perception Survey. Do people make prejudices based on appearance/stereotypes? We used photos as a bias to test this.

POLS 205 Political Science as a Social Science. Making Inferences from Samples

Family Studies Center Methods Workshop

Conditional Probability, Hypothesis Testing, and the Monty Hall Problem

ANSWER SHEET FINAL EXAM MATH 111 SPRING 2009 (PRINT ABOVE IN LARGE CAPITALS) CIRCLE LECTURE HOUR 10AM 2PM FIRST NAME: (PRINT ABOVE IN CAPITALS)

Marcello Pagano [JOTTER WEEK 5 SAMPLING DISTRIBUTIONS ] Central Limit Theorem, Confidence Intervals and Hypothesis Testing

Statistics for Experimentalists Prof. Kannan. A Department of Chemical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology - Madras

MATH 1000 PROJECT IDEAS

A Layperson s Guide to Hypothesis Testing By Michael Reames and Gabriel Kemeny ProcessGPS

Nigerian University Students Attitudes toward Pentecostalism: Pilot Study Report NPCRC Technical Report #N1102

Statistics, Politics, and Policy

Module - 02 Lecturer - 09 Inferential Statistics - Motivation

Experimental Design. Introduction

Introduction Chapter 1 of Social Statistics

Discussion Notes for Bayesian Reasoning

The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support

Statistical Inference Casella

Logical (formal) fallacies

Tests of Homogeneity and Independence

Computational Learning Theory: Agnostic Learning

CSSS/SOC/STAT 321 Case-Based Statistics I. Introduction to Probability

Session 10 INDUCTIVE REASONONING IN THE SCIENCES & EVERYDAY LIFE( PART 1)

A FIRST COURSE IN PARAMETRIC INFERENCE BY B. K. KALE DOWNLOAD EBOOK : A FIRST COURSE IN PARAMETRIC INFERENCE BY B. K. KALE PDF

6.041SC Probabilistic Systems Analysis and Applied Probability, Fall 2013 Transcript Lecture 21

Project: The Power of a Hypothesis Test

CHAPTER 17: UNCERTAINTY AND RANDOM: WHEN IS CONCLUSION JUSTIFIED?

A Scientific Realism-Based Probabilistic Approach to Popper's Problem of Confirmation

Chance, Chaos and the Principle of Sufficient Reason

Lecture 2.1 INTRO TO LOGIC/ ARGUMENTS. Recognize an argument when you see one (in media, articles, people s claims).

Probability Distributions TEACHER NOTES MATH NSPIRED

CS485/685 Lecture 5: Jan 19, 2016

CHAPTER FIVE SAMPLING DISTRIBUTIONS, STATISTICAL INFERENCE, AND NULL HYPOTHESIS TESTING

NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD FOR RELEASE DECEMBER 30, 2013

Chong Ho Yu, Ph.D., D. Phil Azusa Pacific University. February Presented at Southern California Christian in Science Conference, Azusa, CA

Causal fallacies; Causation and experiments. Phil 12: Logic and Decision Making Winter 2010 UC San Diego 2/26/2010

The World Wide Web and the U.S. Political News Market: Online Appendices

ABC News' Guide to Polls & Public Opinion

UNIT 3 MODULE 5 PROBABILITIES INVOLVING NEGATIONS, DISJUNCTIONS, and CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY

NPTEL NPTEL ONINE CERTIFICATION COURSE. Introduction to Machine Learning. Lecture-59 Ensemble Methods- Bagging,Committee Machines and Stacking

The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism

It is One Tailed F-test since the variance of treatment is expected to be large if the null hypothesis is rejected.

Same-different and A-not A tests with sensr. Same-Different and the Degree-of-Difference tests. Outline. Christine Borgen Linander

MITOCW watch?v=ogo1gpxsuzu

Appendix 1. Towers Watson Report. UMC Call to Action Vital Congregations Research Project Findings Report for Steering Team

EFFECTS OF A YEC APOLOGETICS CLASS ON STUDENT WORLDVIEW 1

World without Design: The Ontological Consequences of Natural- ism , by Michael C. Rea.

Detachment, Probability, and Maximum Likelihood

Canadians say our moral values are weakening fourto-one over those who say they re getting stronger

The Birthday Problem

May Parish Life Survey. St. Mary of the Knobs Floyds Knobs, Indiana

Scientific Arguments

MITOCW watch?v=4hrhg4euimo

How many imputations do you need? A two stage calculation using a quadratic rule

Survey of Pastors. Source of Data in This Report

Module 9- Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Content Area Variations of Academic Language

Scientific Realism and Empiricism

climate change in the american mind Americans Global Warming Beliefs and Attitudes in March 2012

January Parish Life Survey. Saint Paul Parish Macomb, Illinois

Philosophy of Science. Ross Arnold, Summer 2014 Lakeside institute of Theology

January Rafi Smith. Smith Consulting

Evidential arguments from evil

Measuring religious intolerance across Indonesian provinces

Peace Index September Prof. Ephraim Yaar and Prof. Tamar Hermann

Syllabus for GBIB 626 The Book of Acts 3 Credit Hours Spring 2015

Why Good Science Is Not Value-Free

Video: How does understanding whether or not an argument is inductive or deductive help me?

Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning Strong Syllogism

MLLunsford, Spring Activity: Conditional Probability and The Law of Total Probability

Statistical Inference Without Frequentist Justifications

1/17/2018 ECE 313. Probability with Engineering Applications Section B Y. Lu. ECE 313 is quite a bit different from your other engineering courses.

Laboratory Exercise Saratoga Springs Temple Site Locator

Philosophy Epistemology Topic 5 The Justification of Induction 1. Hume s Skeptical Challenge to Induction

The SAT Essay: An Argument-Centered Strategy

Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute, The Hague, The Netherlands

August Parish Life Survey. Saint Benedict Parish Johnstown, Pennsylvania

MEASURING THE TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN THE INDONESIAN UNIVERSITIES: FROM THE PERSPECTIVES OF FACULTY MEMBERS THESIS

Moving from Analysis to Evaluation. Or, Well, it s my opinion isn t enough anymore

April Parish Life Survey. Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton Parish Las Vegas, Nevada

Factors Influencing on Peaceful Co-Existence: Christian s Living in Tehran

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN CRISIS New Jersey Residents Blame Church Leaders

ARE JEWS MORE POLARISED IN THEIR SOCIAL ATTITUDES THAN NON-JEWS? EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM THE 1995 JPR STUDY

Inductive Logic. Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.

Syllabus for THE 470 Philosophy of Religion 3.0 Credit Hours Fall The major goals are to enable the student to do the following:

ECONOMETRIC METHODOLOGY AND THE STATUS OF ECONOMICS. Cormac O Dea. Junior Sophister

There are two common forms of deductively valid conditional argument: modus ponens and modus tollens.

ECE 5424: Introduction to Machine Learning

PHI 1700: Global Ethics

This handout discusses common types of philosophy assignments and strategies and resources that will help you write your philosophy papers.

Serial numbers, duplicates etc July at 2:10 AM

Is Epistemic Probability Pascalian?

NEW TESTAMENT PSALMS PROVERBS BROWN POCKET BIBLE BY UNKNOWN

Working Paper Presbyterian Church in Canada Statistics

Transcription:

1 INTRODUCTION TO HYPOTHESIS TESTING Unit 4A - Statistical Inference Part 1

Now we will begin our discussion of hypothesis testing. This is a complex topic which we will be working with for the rest of the semester. If this is your first statistics course (or even if it is not) you may need to spend a good amount of time on these ideas over the next few weeks to become comfortable with them. The materials are presented so that you will cover a good bit of information now but we don t expect it to all make sense immediately. The materials in Unit 4B will offer opportunity to continue developing your understanding of estimation and hypothesis testing in more realistic situations where we will rely on software to perform the calculations. For now, we will still be working by hand to develop some instincts and understanding about this process for hypothesis testing we will focus on the case for one population proportion to illustrate by hand and then allow software to help us in all other situations. 1

2 Main Inference Topics Point Estimation Interval Estimation Hypothesis Testing

We have discussed point estimation, where we estimate an unknown parameter using a single number calculated from the sample data and Interval Estimation where we estimate an unknown parameter using an interval of values which Quantifies the magnitude of estimation error with a certain confidence level And is likely to contain the true value of that parameter Now we are moving into much different territory. For hypothesis testing, the idea, logic, and goal are quite different. In Hypothesis Testing: we begin with a claim about the population, and we check whether or not the data obtained from the sample provide evidence AGAINST this claim. 2

3 Logic of Hypothesis Testing Student s Claim (Null) I did not cheat Instructor s Claim (Alternative) The student did cheat

For now we want to focus on the concepts and not the details of any particular test. Consider the situation where a case of suspected cheating on an exam is brought before the disciplinary committee of a university. We have two opposing claims. The student s claim: I did not cheat on the exam. The instructor s claim: The student did cheat on the exam. Adhering to the principle innocent until proven guilty, the committee asks the instructor for evidence to support his claim. In this situation, the student s claim is assumed to be true unless sufficient evidence can be brought forth. Note that this will be called the null hypothesis in our statistical definitions. The opposing claim by the instructor requires evidence to support it in order to reject the student s claim. This will be called the alternative hypothesis. The instructor explains that the exam had two versions, and shows the committee members that on three separate exam questions, the student used in his solution numbers that were given in the other version of the exam. Is this enough evidence? The committee members all agree that it would be extremely unlikely to get evidence like that if the student s claim of not cheating had been true. In other words, the instructor brought forward strong enough evidence to reject the student s claim, and conclude that the student did indeed cheat on the exam. Although we will be using data to make these decisions and our hypotheses will have very specific forms for each scenario, this example illustrates the logic of hypothesis testing nicely. 3

Basic Process of Hypothesis Testing 4

Here is how the process of statistical hypothesis testing works: We have two claims about what is going on in the population. Let s call them claim 1 (this will be the null claim or hypothesis) and claim 2 (this will be the alternative). Similar to our example where the student s claim is challenged by the instructor s claim, in general the null, claim 1 is challenged by the alternative, claim 2. In statistics, these claims are about the value of a population parameter. We choose a sample, collect relevant data and summarize them (this is similar to the instructor collecting evidence from the student s exam). For statistical tests, this step will also involve checking any conditions or assumptions. Then, we figure out how likely it is to observe data like the data we obtained (or more extreme), if claim 1 is true. (Note that the wording how likely implies that this step requires some kind of probability calculation). In the story, the committee members assessed how likely it is to observe evidence such as the instructor provided, had the student s claim of not cheating been true. Based on what we found in the previous step, we make our decision: If, after assuming claim 1 is true, we find that it would be extremely rare to observe data as strong as ours or stronger in favor of claim 2, then we have strong evidence against claim 1, and we reject it in favor of claim 2. Later we will see this corresponds to a small p value. If, after assuming claim 1 is true, we find that observing data as strong as ours or stronger in favor of claim 2 is NOT VERY RARE, then we do not have enough evidence against claim 1, and therefore we cannot reject it in favor of claim 2. Later we will see this corresponds to a p value which is not small. In our story, the committee decided that it would be extremely unlikely to find the evidence that the instructor provided had the student's claim of not cheating been true. In other words, the members felt that it is extremely unlikely that it is just a coincidence (random chance) that the student used the numbers from the other version of the exam on three separate problems. The committee members therefore decided to reject the student's claim and concluded that the student had, indeed, cheated on the exam. 4

5 Applet Reasoning of a Statistical Test digitalfirst.bfwpub.com/stats_applet/stats_applet_15_reasoning.html

http://digitalfirst.bfwpub.com/stats_applet/stats_applet_15_reasoning.html We will use an applet to illustrate how we might make decisions from gathered data. We are asked to determine if the player s free throw percentage is 80% or not 80%. To begin we click shoot by default it will take 10 shots at a time. 5

Applet Reasoning of a Statistical Test 6

In this example, after around 20 shots, I was willing to conclude that this player s free throw percentage is not 80%. I clicked the box to show the true probability which seems to be about 55%. 6

Applet Reasoning of a Statistical Test 7

You should find that it will take much more shots to feel comfortable concluding that it absolutely IS 80% and maybe you will never find it easy to make this conclusion without checking the box to see the true value. In statistics we will never be able to prove this claim of equality. Here I took 170 shots but thought that maybe it was a little less than 80 early on and revealed the line to myself too soon! 7

Applet Reasoning of a Statistical Test 8

You should also find that it will take more shots to feel comfortable concluding that it absolutely different from 80% the closer the true value is to this claim of 80%. Here I took 80 shots when the true value was 70%. This applet help s illustrate the kind of evidence data can provide. We will learn to calculate a probability on which we will base our conclusions here we are just relying on our subjective view of the data and likely if you repeat this applet yourself a few times, you may not always make the correct choice. We will soon learn that statistical hypothesis testing also has the potential to make the wrong decision too. 8

Basic Process of Hypothesis Testing 9

There are more examples in the materials. Review them carefully and pay attention to the wording in the conclusions. Note that there are two types of conclusions: "The data provide enough evidence to reject claim 1 and thus we accept claim 2"; OR "The data do not provide enough evidence to reject claim 1." In particular, note that in the second type of conclusion we did not say: "I accept claim 1," but only "I don't have enough evidence to reject claim 1." We will come back to this issue later, but this is a good place to begin to make you aware of this subtle difference. 9

10 INTRODUCTION TO HYPOTHESIS TESTING

That gives an overview of the ideas and logic of hypothesis testing. Next we will cover the steps in more detail. 10