hypothesis testing z value

Z-test Calculator

What is a z-test, when do i use z-tests, z-test formula, p-value from z-test, two-tailed z-test and one-tailed z-test, z-test critical values & critical regions, how to use the one-sample z-test calculator, z-test examples.

This Z-test calculator is a tool that helps you perform a one-sample Z-test on the population's mean . Two forms of this test - a two-tailed Z-test and a one-tailed Z-tests - exist, and can be used depending on your needs. You can also choose whether the calculator should determine the p-value from Z-test or you'd rather use the critical value approach!

Read on to learn more about Z-test in statistics, and, in particular, when to use Z-tests, what is the Z-test formula, and whether to use Z-test vs. t-test. As a bonus, we give some step-by-step examples of how to perform Z-tests!

Or you may also check our t-statistic calculator , where you can learn the concept of another essential statistic. If you are also interested in F-test, check our F-statistic calculator .

A one sample Z-test is one of the most popular location tests. The null hypothesis is that the population mean value is equal to a given number, μ 0 \mu_0 μ 0 ​ :

We perform a two-tailed Z-test if we want to test whether the population mean is not μ 0 \mu_0 μ 0 ​ :

and a one-tailed Z-test if we want to test whether the population mean is less/greater than μ 0 \mu_0 μ 0 ​ :

Let us now discuss the assumptions of a one-sample Z-test.

You may use a Z-test if your sample consists of independent data points and:

the data is normally distributed , and you know the population variance ;

the sample is large , and data follows a distribution which has a finite mean and variance. You don't need to know the population variance.

The reason these two possibilities exist is that we want the test statistics that follow the standard normal distribution N ( 0 , 1 ) \mathrm N(0, 1) N ( 0 , 1 ) . In the former case, it is an exact standard normal distribution, while in the latter, it is approximately so, thanks to the central limit theorem.

The question remains, "When is my sample considered large?" Well, there's no universal criterion. In general, the more data points you have, the better the approximation works. Statistics textbooks recommend having no fewer than 50 data points, while 30 is considered the bare minimum.

Let x 1 , . . . , x n x_1, ..., x_n x 1 ​ , ... , x n ​ be an independent sample following the normal distribution N ( μ , σ 2 ) \mathrm N(\mu, \sigma^2) N ( μ , σ 2 ) , i.e., with a mean equal to μ \mu μ , and variance equal to σ 2 \sigma ^2 σ 2 .

We pose the null hypothesis, H 0  ⁣  ⁣ :  ⁣  ⁣   μ = μ 0 \mathrm H_0 \!\!:\!\! \mu = \mu_0 H 0 ​ :   μ = μ 0 ​ .

We define the test statistic, Z , as:

x ˉ \bar x x ˉ is the sample mean, i.e., x ˉ = ( x 1 + . . . + x n ) / n \bar x = (x_1 + ... + x_n) / n x ˉ = ( x 1 ​ + ... + x n ​ ) / n ;

μ 0 \mu_0 μ 0 ​ is the mean postulated in H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ ;

n n n is sample size; and

σ \sigma σ is the population standard deviation.

In what follows, the uppercase Z Z Z stands for the test statistic (treated as a random variable), while the lowercase z z z will denote an actual value of Z Z Z , computed for a given sample drawn from N(μ,σ²).

If H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ holds, then the sum S n = x 1 + . . . + x n S_n = x_1 + ... + x_n S n ​ = x 1 ​ + ... + x n ​ follows the normal distribution, with mean n μ 0 n \mu_0 n μ 0 ​ and variance n 2 σ n^2 \sigma n 2 σ . As Z Z Z is the standardization (z-score) of S n / n S_n/n S n ​ / n , we can conclude that the test statistic Z Z Z follows the standard normal distribution N ( 0 , 1 ) \mathrm N(0, 1) N ( 0 , 1 ) , provided that H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ is true. By the way, we have the z-score calculator if you want to focus on this value alone.

If our data does not follow a normal distribution, or if the population standard deviation is unknown (and thus in the formula for Z Z Z we substitute the population standard deviation σ \sigma σ with sample standard deviation), then the test statistics Z Z Z is not necessarily normal. However, if the sample is sufficiently large, then the central limit theorem guarantees that Z Z Z is approximately N ( 0 , 1 ) \mathrm N(0, 1) N ( 0 , 1 ) .

In the sections below, we will explain to you how to use the value of the test statistic, z z z , to make a decision , whether or not you should reject the null hypothesis . Two approaches can be used in order to arrive at that decision: the p-value approach, and critical value approach - and we cover both of them! Which one should you use? In the past, the critical value approach was more popular because it was difficult to calculate p-value from Z-test. However, with help of modern computers, we can do it fairly easily, and with decent precision. In general, you are strongly advised to report the p-value of your tests!

Formally, the p-value is the smallest level of significance at which the null hypothesis could be rejected. More intuitively, p-value answers the questions: provided that I live in a world where the null hypothesis holds, how probable is it that the value of the test statistic will be at least as extreme as the z z z - value I've got for my sample? Hence, a small p-value means that your result is very improbable under the null hypothesis, and so there is strong evidence against the null hypothesis - the smaller the p-value, the stronger the evidence.

To find the p-value, you have to calculate the probability that the test statistic, Z Z Z , is at least as extreme as the value we've actually observed, z z z , provided that the null hypothesis is true. (The probability of an event calculated under the assumption that H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ is true will be denoted as P r ( event ∣ H 0 ) \small \mathrm{Pr}(\text{event} | \mathrm{H_0}) Pr ( event ∣ H 0 ​ ) .) It is the alternative hypothesis which determines what more extreme means :

• Two-tailed Z-test: extreme values are those whose absolute value exceeds ∣ z ∣ |z| ∣ z ∣ , so those smaller than − ∣ z ∣ -|z| − ∣ z ∣ or greater than ∣ z ∣ |z| ∣ z ∣ . Therefore, we have:

The symmetry of the normal distribution gives:

• Left-tailed Z-test: extreme values are those smaller than z z z , so
• Right-tailed Z-test: extreme values are those greater than z z z , so

To compute these probabilities, we can use the cumulative distribution function, (cdf) of N ( 0 , 1 ) \mathrm N(0, 1) N ( 0 , 1 ) , which for a real number, x x x , is defined as:

Also, p-values can be nicely depicted as the area under the probability density function (pdf) of N ( 0 , 1 ) \mathrm N(0, 1) N ( 0 , 1 ) , due to:

With all the knowledge you've got from the previous section, you're ready to learn about Z-tests.

• Two-tailed Z-test:

From the fact that Φ ( − z ) = 1 − Φ ( z ) \Phi(-z) = 1 - \Phi(z) Φ ( − z ) = 1 − Φ ( z ) , we deduce that

The p-value is the area under the probability distribution function (pdf) both to the left of − ∣ z ∣ -|z| − ∣ z ∣ , and to the right of ∣ z ∣ |z| ∣ z ∣ :

• Left-tailed Z-test:

The p-value is the area under the pdf to the left of our z z z :

• Right-tailed Z-test:

The p-value is the area under the pdf to the right of z z z :

The decision as to whether or not you should reject the null hypothesis can be now made at any significance level, α \alpha α , you desire!

if the p-value is less than, or equal to, α \alpha α , the null hypothesis is rejected at this significance level; and

if the p-value is greater than α \alpha α , then there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis at this significance level.

The critical value approach involves comparing the value of the test statistic obtained for our sample, z z z , to the so-called critical values . These values constitute the boundaries of regions where the test statistic is highly improbable to lie . Those regions are often referred to as the critical regions , or rejection regions . The decision of whether or not you should reject the null hypothesis is then based on whether or not our z z z belongs to the critical region.

The critical regions depend on a significance level, α \alpha α , of the test, and on the alternative hypothesis. The choice of α \alpha α is arbitrary; in practice, the values of 0.1, 0.05, or 0.01 are most commonly used as α \alpha α .

Once we agree on the value of α \alpha α , we can easily determine the critical regions of the Z-test:

To decide the fate of H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ , check whether or not your z z z falls in the critical region:

If yes, then reject H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ and accept H 1 \mathrm H_1 H 1 ​ ; and

If no, then there is not enough evidence to reject H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ .

As you see, the formulae for the critical values of Z-tests involve the inverse, Φ − 1 \Phi^{-1} Φ − 1 , of the cumulative distribution function (cdf) of N ( 0 , 1 ) \mathrm N(0, 1) N ( 0 , 1 ) .

Our calculator reduces all the complicated steps:

Choose the alternative hypothesis: two-tailed or left/right-tailed.

In our Z-test calculator, you can decide whether to use the p-value or critical regions approach. In the latter case, set the significance level, α \alpha α .

Enter the value of the test statistic, z z z . If you don't know it, then you can enter some data that will allow us to calculate your z z z for you:

• sample mean x ˉ \bar x x ˉ (If you have raw data, go to the average calculator to determine the mean);
• tested mean μ 0 \mu_0 μ 0 ​ ;
• sample size n n n ; and
• population standard deviation σ \sigma σ (or sample standard deviation if your sample is large).

Results appear immediately below the calculator.

If you want to find z z z based on p-value , please remember that in the case of two-tailed tests there are two possible values of z z z : one positive and one negative, and they are opposite numbers. This Z-test calculator returns the positive value in such a case. In order to find the other possible value of z z z for a given p-value, just take the number opposite to the value of z z z displayed by the calculator.

To make sure that you've fully understood the essence of Z-test, let's go through some examples:

• A bottle filling machine follows a normal distribution. Its standard deviation, as declared by the manufacturer, is equal to 30 ml. A juice seller claims that the volume poured in each bottle is, on average, one liter, i.e., 1000 ml, but we suspect that in fact the average volume is smaller than that...

Formally, the hypotheses that we set are the following:

H 0  ⁣ :   μ = 1000  ml \mathrm H_0 \! : \mu = 1000 \text{ ml} H 0 ​ :   μ = 1000  ml

H 1  ⁣ :   μ < 1000  ml \mathrm H_1 \! : \mu \lt 1000 \text{ ml} H 1 ​ :   μ < 1000  ml

We went to a shop and bought a sample of 9 bottles. After carefully measuring the volume of juice in each bottle, we've obtained the following sample (in milliliters):

1020 , 970 , 1000 , 980 , 1010 , 930 , 950 , 980 , 980 \small 1020, 970, 1000, 980, 1010, 930, 950, 980, 980 1020 , 970 , 1000 , 980 , 1010 , 930 , 950 , 980 , 980 .

Sample size: n = 9 n = 9 n = 9 ;

Sample mean: x ˉ = 980   m l \bar x = 980 \ \mathrm{ml} x ˉ = 980   ml ;

Population standard deviation: σ = 30   m l \sigma = 30 \ \mathrm{ml} σ = 30   ml ;

And, therefore, p-value = Φ ( − 2 ) ≈ 0.0228 \text{p-value} = \Phi(-2) \approx 0.0228 p-value = Φ ( − 2 ) ≈ 0.0228 .

As 0.0228 < 0.05 0.0228 \lt 0.05 0.0228 < 0.05 , we conclude that our suspicions aren't groundless; at the most common significance level, 0.05, we would reject the producer's claim, H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ , and accept the alternative hypothesis, H 1 \mathrm H_1 H 1 ​ .

We tossed a coin 50 times. We got 20 tails and 30 heads. Is there sufficient evidence to claim that the coin is biased?

Clearly, our data follows Bernoulli distribution, with some success probability p p p and variance σ 2 = p ( 1 − p ) \sigma^2 = p (1-p) σ 2 = p ( 1 − p ) . However, the sample is large, so we can safely perform a Z-test. We adopt the convention that getting tails is a success.

Let us state the null and alternative hypotheses:

H 0  ⁣ :   p = 0.5 \mathrm H_0 \! : p = 0.5 H 0 ​ :   p = 0.5 (the coin is fair - the probability of tails is 0.5 0.5 0.5 )

H 1  ⁣ :   p ≠ 0.5 \mathrm H_1 \! : p \ne 0.5 H 1 ​ :   p  = 0.5 (the coin is biased - the probability of tails differs from 0.5 0.5 0.5 )

In our sample we have 20 successes (denoted by ones) and 30 failures (denoted by zeros), so:

Sample size n = 50 n = 50 n = 50 ;

Sample mean x ˉ = 20 / 50 = 0.4 \bar x = 20/50 = 0.4 x ˉ = 20/50 = 0.4 ;

Population standard deviation is given by σ = 0.5 × 0.5 \sigma = \sqrt{0.5 \times 0.5} σ = 0.5 × 0.5 ​ (because 0.5 0.5 0.5 is the proportion p p p hypothesized in H 0 \mathrm H_0 H 0 ​ ). Hence, σ = 0.5 \sigma = 0.5 σ = 0.5 ;

• And, therefore

Since 0.1573 > 0.1 0.1573 \gt 0.1 0.1573 > 0.1 we don't have enough evidence to reject the claim that the coin is fair , even at such a large significance level as 0.1 0.1 0.1 . In that case, you may safely toss it to your Witcher or use the coin flip probability calculator to find your chances of getting, e.g., 10 heads in a row (which are extremely low!).

What is the difference between Z-test vs t-test?

We use a t-test for testing the population mean of a normally distributed dataset which had an unknown population standard deviation . We get this by replacing the population standard deviation in the Z-test statistic formula by the sample standard deviation, which means that this new test statistic follows (provided that H₀ holds) the t-Student distribution with n-1 degrees of freedom instead of N(0,1) .

When should I use t-test over the Z-test?

For large samples, the t-Student distribution with n degrees of freedom approaches the N(0,1). Hence, as long as there are a sufficient number of data points (at least 30), it does not really matter whether you use the Z-test or the t-test, since the results will be almost identical. However, for small samples with unknown variance, remember to use the t-test instead of Z-test .

How do I calculate the Z test statistic?

To calculate the Z test statistic:

• Compute the arithmetic mean of your sample .
• From this mean subtract the mean postulated in null hypothesis .
• Multiply by the square root of size sample .
• Divide by the population standard deviation .
• That's it, you've just computed the Z test statistic!

6 sided dice probability

Circumference, fractional odds, plant spacing.

• Biology (100)
• Chemistry (100)
• Construction (144)
• Conversion (294)
• Ecology (30)
• Everyday life (262)
• Finance (569)
• Health (440)
• Physics (509)
• Sports (104)
• Statistics (182)
• Other (181)
• Discover Omni (40)

Z-Test for Statistical Hypothesis Testing Explained

The Z-test is a statistical hypothesis test used to determine where the distribution of the test statistic we are measuring, like the mean , is part of the normal distribution .

There are multiple types of Z-tests, however, we’ll focus on the easiest and most well known one, the one sample mean test. This is used to determine if the difference between the mean of a sample and the mean of a population is statistically significant.

What Is a Z-Test?

A Z-test is a type of statistical hypothesis test where the test-statistic follows a normal distribution.  

The name Z-test comes from the Z-score of the normal distribution. This is a measure of how many standard deviations away a raw score or sample statistics is from the populations’ mean.

Z-tests are the most common statistical tests conducted in fields such as healthcare and data science . Therefore, it’s an essential concept to understand.

Requirements for a Z-Test

In order to conduct a Z-test, your statistics need to meet a few requirements, including:

• A Sample size that’s greater than 30. This is because we want to ensure our sample mean comes from a distribution that is normal. As stated by the c entral limit theorem , any distribution can be approximated as normally distributed if it contains more than 30 data points.
• The standard deviation and mean of the population is known .
• The sample data is collected/acquired randomly .

More on Data Science:   What Is Bootstrapping Statistics?

Z-Test Steps

There are four steps to complete a Z-test. Let’s examine each one.

4 Steps to a Z-Test

• State the null hypothesis.
• State the alternate hypothesis.
• Choose your critical value.
• Calculate your Z-test statistics. 

1. State the Null Hypothesis

The first step in a Z-test is to state the null hypothesis, H_0 . This what you believe to be true from the population, which could be the mean of the population, μ_0 :

2. State the Alternate Hypothesis

Next, state the alternate hypothesis, H_1 . This is what you observe from your sample. If the sample mean is different from the population’s mean, then we say the mean is not equal to μ_0:

3. Choose Your Critical Value

Then, choose your critical value, α , which determines whether you accept or reject the null hypothesis. Typically for a Z-test we would use a statistical significance of 5 percent which is z = +/- 1.96 standard deviations from the population’s mean in the normal distribution:

This critical value is based on confidence intervals.

4. Calculate Your Z-Test Statistic

Compute the Z-test Statistic using the sample mean, μ_1 , the population mean, μ_0 , the number of data points in the sample, n and the population’s standard deviation, σ :

If the test statistic is greater (or lower depending on the test we are conducting) than the critical value, then the alternate hypothesis is true because the sample’s mean is statistically significant enough from the population mean.

Another way to think about this is if the sample mean is so far away from the population mean, the alternate hypothesis has to be true or the sample is a complete anomaly.

More on Data Science: Basic Probability Theory and Statistics Terms to Know

Z-Test Example

Let’s go through an example to fully understand the one-sample mean Z-test.

A school says that its pupils are, on average, smarter than other schools. It takes a sample of 50 students whose average IQ measures to be 110. The population, or the rest of the schools, has an average IQ of 100 and standard deviation of 20. Is the school’s claim correct?

The null and alternate hypotheses are:

Where we are saying that our sample, the school, has a higher mean IQ than the population mean.

Now, this is what’s called a right-sided, one-tailed test as our sample mean is greater than the population’s mean. So, choosing a critical value of 5 percent, which equals a Z-score of 1.96 , we can only reject the null hypothesis if our Z-test statistic is greater than 1.96.

If the school claimed its students’ IQs were an average of 90, then we would use a left-tailed test, as shown in the figure above. We would then only reject the null hypothesis if our Z-test statistic is less than -1.96.

Computing our Z-test statistic, we see:

Therefore, we have sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis, and the school’s claim is right.

Hope you enjoyed this article on Z-tests. In this post, we only addressed the most simple case, the one-sample mean test. However, there are other types of tests, but they all follow the same process just with some small nuances.  

Built In’s expert contributor network publishes thoughtful, solutions-oriented stories written by innovative tech professionals. It is the tech industry’s definitive destination for sharing compelling, first-person accounts of problem-solving on the road to innovation.

Great Companies Need Great People. That's Where We Come In.

10 Chapter 10: Hypothesis Testing with Z

Setting up the hypotheses.

When setting up the hypotheses with z, the parameter is associated with a sample mean (in the previous chapter examples the parameters for the null used 0). Using z is an occasion in which the null hypothesis is a value other than 0. For example, if we are working with mothers in the U.S. whose children are at risk of low birth weight, we can use 7.47 pounds, the average birth weight in the US, as our null value and test for differences against that. For now, we will focus on testing a value of a single mean against what we expect from the population.

Using birthweight as an example, our null hypothesis takes the form: H 0 : μ = 7.47 Notice that we are testing the value for μ, the population parameter, NOT the sample statistic ̅X (or M). We are referring to the data right now in raw form (we have not standardized it using z yet). Again, using inferential statistics, we are interested in understanding the population, drawing from our sample observations. For the research question, we have a mean value from the sample to use, we have specific data is – it is observed and used as a comparison for a set point.

As mentioned earlier, the alternative hypothesis is simply the reverse of the null hypothesis, and there are three options, depending on where we expect the difference to lie. We will set the criteria for rejecting the null hypothesis based on the directionality (greater than, less than, or not equal to) of the alternative.

If we expect our obtained sample mean to be above or below the null hypothesis value (knowing which direction), we set a directional hypothesis. O ur alternative hypothesis takes the form based on the research question itself. In our example with birthweight, this could be presented as H A : μ > 7.47 or H A : μ < 7.47. 

Note that we should only use a directional hypothesis if we have a good reason, based on prior observations or research, to suspect a particular direction. When we do not know the direction, such as when we are entering a new area of research, we use a non-directional alternative hypothesis. In our birthweight example, this could be set as H A : μ ≠ 7.47

In working with data for this course we will need to set a critical value of the test statistic for alpha (α) for use of test statistic tables in the back of the book. This is determining the critical rejection region that has a set critical value based on α.

Determining Critical Value from α

We set alpha (α) before collecting data in order to determine whether or not we should reject the null hypothesis. We set this value beforehand to avoid biasing ourselves by viewing our results and then determining what criteria we should use.

When a research hypothesis predicts an effect but does not predict a direction for the effect, it is called a non-directional hypothesis . To test the significance of a non-directional hypothesis, we have to consider the possibility that the sample could be extreme at either tail of the comparison distribution. We call this a two-tailed test .

Figure 1. showing a 2-tail test for non-directional hypothesis for z for area C is the critical rejection region.

When a research hypothesis predicts a direction for the effect, it is called a directional hypothesis . To test the significance of a directional hypothesis, we have to consider the possibility that the sample could be extreme at one-tail of the comparison distribution. We call this a one-tailed test .

Figure 2. showing a 1-tail test for a directional hypothesis (predicting an increase) for z for area C is the critical rejection region.

Determining Cutoff Scores with Two-Tailed Tests

Typically we specify an α level before analyzing the data. If the data analysis results in a probability value below the α level, then the null hypothesis is rejected; if it is not, then the null hypothesis is not rejected. In other words, if our data produce values that meet or exceed this threshold, then we have sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis ; if not, we fail to reject the null (we never “accept” the null). According to this perspective, if a result is significant, then it does not matter how significant it is. Moreover, if it is not significant, then it does not matter how close to being significant it is. Therefore, if the 0.05 level is being used, then probability values of 0.049 and 0.001 are treated identically. Similarly, probability values of 0.06 and 0.34 are treated identically. Note we will discuss ways to address effect size (which is related to this challenge of NHST).

When setting the probability value, there is a special complication in a two-tailed test. We have to divide the significance percentage between the two tails. For example, with a 5% significance level, we reject the null hypothesis only if the sample is so extreme that it is in either the top 2.5% or the bottom 2.5% of the comparison distribution. This keeps the overall level of significance at a total of 5%. A one-tailed test does have such an extreme value but with a one-tailed test only one side of the distribution is considered.

Figure 3. Critical value differences in one and two-tail tests. Photo Credit

Let’s re view th e set critical values for Z.

We discussed z-scores and probability in chapter 8.  If we revisit the z-score for 5% and 1%, we can identify the critical regions for the critical rejection areas from the unit standard normal table.

• A two-tailed test at the 5% level has a critical boundary Z score of +1.96 and -1.96
• A one-tailed test at the 5% level has a critical boundary Z score of +1.64 or -1.64
• A two-tailed test at the 1% level has a critical boundary Z score of +2.58 and -2.58
• A one-tailed test at the 1% level has a critical boundary Z score of +2.33 or -2.33.

Review: Critical values, p-values, and significance level

There are two criteria we use to assess whether our data meet the thresholds established by our chosen significance level, and they both have to do with our discussions of probability and distributions. Recall that probability refers to the likelihood of an event, given some situation or set of conditions. In hypothesis testing, that situation is the assumption that the null hypothesis value is the correct value, or that there is no effec t. The value laid out in H 0 is our condition under which we interpret our results. To reject this assumption, and thereby reject the null hypothesis, we need results that would be very unlikely if the null was true.

Now recall that values of z which fall in the tails of the standard normal distribution represent unlikely values. That is, the proportion of the area under the curve as or more extreme than z is very small as we get into the tails of the distribution. Our significance level corresponds to the area under the tail that is exactly equal to α: if we use our normal criterion of α = .05, then 5% of the area under the curve becomes what we call the rejection region (also called the critical region) of the distribution. This is illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4: The rejection region for a one-tailed test

The shaded rejection region takes us 5% of the area under the curve. Any result which falls in that region is sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis.

The rejection region is bounded by a specific z-value, as is any area under the curve. In hypothesis testing, the value corresponding to a specific rejection region is called the critical value, z crit (“z-crit”) or z* (hence the other name “critical region”). Finding the critical value works exactly the same as finding the z-score corresponding to any area under the curve like we did in Unit 1. If we go to the normal table, we will find that the z-score corresponding to 5% of the area under the curve is equal to 1.645 (z = 1.64 corresponds to 0.0405 and z = 1.65 corresponds to 0.0495, so .05 is exactly in between them) if we go to the right and -1.645 if we go to the left. The direction must be determined by your alternative hypothesis, and drawing then shading the distribution is helpful for keeping directionality straight.

Suppose, however, that we want to do a non-directional test. We need to put the critical region in both tails, but we don’t want to increase the overall size of the rejection region (for reasons we will see later). To do this, we simply split it in half so that an equal proportion of the area under the curve falls in each tail’s rejection region. For α = .05, this means 2.5% of the area is in each tail, which, based on the z-table, corresponds to critical values of z* = ±1.96. This is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Two-tailed rejection region

Thus, any z-score falling outside ±1.96 (greater than 1.96 in absolute value) falls in the rejection region. When we use z-scores in this way, the obtained value of z (sometimes called z-obtained) is something known as a test statistic, which is simply an inferential statistic used to test a null hypothesis.

Calculate the test statistic: Z

Now that we understand setting up the hypothesis and determining the outcome, let’s examine hypothesis testing with z!  The next step is to carry out the study and get the actual results for our sample. Central to hypothesis test is comparison of the population and sample means. To make our calculation and determine where the sample is in the hypothesized distribution we calculate the Z for the sample data.

Make a decision

To decide whether to reject the null hypothesis, we compare our sample’s Z score to the Z score that marks our critical boundary. If our sample Z score falls inside the rejection region of the comparison distribution (is greater than the z-score critical boundary) we reject the null hypothesis.

The formula for our z- statistic has not changed:

To formally test our hypothesis, we compare our obtained z-statistic to our critical z-value. If z obt > z crit , that means it falls in the rejection region (to see why, draw a line for z = 2.5 on Figure 1 or Figure 2) and so we reject H 0 . If z obt < z crit , we fail to reject. Remember that as z gets larger, the corresponding area under the curve beyond z gets smaller. Thus, the proportion, or p-value, will be smaller than the area for α, and if the area is smaller, the probability gets smaller. Specifically, the probability of obtaining that result, or a more extreme result, under the condition that the null hypothesis is true gets smaller.

Conversely, if we fail to reject, we know that the proportion will be larger than α because the z-statistic will not be as far into the tail. This is illustrated for a one- tailed test in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Relation between α, z obt , and p

When the null hypothesis is rejected, the effect is said to be statistically significant . Do not confuse statistical significance with practical significance. A small effect can be highly significant if the sample size is large enough.

Why does the word “significant” in the phrase “statistically significant” mean something so different from other uses of the word? Interestingly, this is because the meaning of “significant” in everyday language has changed. It turns out that when the procedures for hypothesis testing were developed, something was “significant” if it signified something. Thus, finding that an effect is statistically significant signifies that the effect is real and not due to chance. Over the years, the meaning of “significant” changed, leading to the potential misinterpretation.

Review: Steps of the Hypothesis Testing Process

The process of testing hypotheses follows a simple four-step procedure. This process will be what we use for the remained of the textbook and course, and though the hypothesis and statistics we use will change, this process will not.

Step 1: State the Hypotheses

Your hypotheses are the first thing you need to lay out. Otherwise, there is nothing to test! You have to state the null hypothesis (which is what we test) and the alternative hypothesis (which is what we expect). These should be stated mathematically as they were presented above AND in words, explaining in normal English what each one means in terms of the research question.

Step 2: Find the Critical Values

Next, we formally lay out the criteria we will use to test our hypotheses. There are two pieces of information that inform our critical values: α, which determines how much of the area under the curve composes our rejection region, and the directionality of the test, which determines where the region will be.

Step 3: Compute the Test Statistic

Once we have our hypotheses and the standards we use to test them, we can collect data and calculate our test statistic, in this case z . This step is where the vast majority of differences in future chapters will arise: different tests used for different data are calculated in different ways, but the way we use and interpret them remains the same.

Step 4: Make the Decision

Finally, once we have our obtained test statistic, we can compare it to our critical value and decide whether we should reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis. When we do this, we must interpret the decision in relation to our research question, stating what we concluded, what we based our conclusion on, and the specific statistics we obtained.

Example: Movie Popcorn

Let’s see how hypothesis testing works in action by working through an example. Say that a movie theater owner likes to keep a very close eye on how much popcorn goes into each bag sold, so he knows that the average bag has 8 cups of popcorn and that this varies a little bit, about half a cup. That is, the known population mean is μ = 8.00 and the known population standard deviation is σ =0.50. The owner wants to make sure that the newest employee is filling bags correctly, so over the course of a week he randomly assesses 25 bags filled by the employee to test for a difference (n = 25). He doesn’t want bags overfilled or under filled, so he looks for differences in both directions. This scenario has all of the information we need to begin our hypothesis testing procedure.

Our manager is looking for a difference in the mean cups of popcorn bags compared to the population mean of 8. We will need both a null and an alternative hypothesis written both mathematically and in words. We’ll always start with the null hypothesis:

H 0 : There is no difference in the cups of popcorn bags from this employee H 0 : μ = 8.00

Notice that we phrase the hypothesis in terms of the population parameter μ, which in this case would be the true average cups of bags filled by the new employee.

Our assumption of no difference, the null hypothesis, is that this mean is exactly

the same as the known population mean value we want it to match, 8.00. Now let’s do the alternative:

H A : There is a difference in the cups of popcorn bags from this employee H A : μ ≠ 8.00

In this case, we don’t know if the bags will be too full or not full enough, so we do a two-tailed alternative hypothesis that there is a difference.

Our critical values are based on two things: the directionality of the test and the level of significance. We decided in step 1 that a two-tailed test is the appropriate directionality. We were given no information about the level of significance, so we assume that α = 0.05 is what we will use. As stated earlier in the chapter, the critical values for a two-tailed z-test at α = 0.05 are z* = ±1.96. This will be the criteria we use to test our hypothesis. We can now draw out our distribution so we can visualize the rejection region and make sure it makes sense

Figure 7: Rejection region for z* = ±1.96

Step 3: Calculate the Test Statistic

Now we come to our formal calculations. Let’s say that the manager collects data and finds that the average cups of this employee’s popcorn bags is ̅X = 7.75 cups. We can now plug this value, along with the values presented in the original problem, into our equation for z:

So our test statistic is z = -2.50, which we can draw onto our rejection region distribution:

Figure 8: Test statistic location

Looking at Figure 5, we can see that our obtained z-statistic falls in the rejection region. We can also directly compare it to our critical value: in terms of absolute value, -2.50 > -1.96, so we reject the null hypothesis. We can now write our conclusion:

When we write our conclusion, we write out the words to communicate what it actually means, but we also include the average sample size we calculated (the exact location doesn’t matter, just somewhere that flows naturally and makes sense) and the z-statistic and p-value. We don’t know the exact p-value, but we do know that because we rejected the null, it must be less than α.

Effect Size

When we reject the null hypothesis, we are stating that the difference we found was statistically significant, but we have mentioned several times that this tells us nothing about practical significance. To get an idea of the actual size of what we found, we can compute a new statistic called an effect size. Effect sizes give us an idea of how large, important, or meaningful a statistically significant effect is.

For mean differences like we calculated here, our effect size is Cohen’s d :

Effect sizes are incredibly useful and provide important information and clarification that overcomes some of the weakness of hypothesis testing. Whenever you find a significant result, you should always calculate an effect size

Table 1. Interpretation of Cohen’s d

Example: Office Temperature

Let’s do another example to solidify our understanding. Let’s say that the office building you work in is supposed to be kept at 74 degree Fahrenheit but is allowed

to vary by 1 degree in either direction. You suspect that, as a cost saving measure, the temperature was secretly set higher. You set up a formal way to test your hypothesis.

You start by laying out the null hypothesis:

H 0 : There is no difference in the average building temperature H 0 : μ = 74

Next you state the alternative hypothesis. You have reason to suspect a specific direction of change, so you make a one-tailed test:

H A : The average building temperature is higher than claimed H A : μ > 74

Now that you have everything set up, you spend one week collecting temperature data:

You calculate the average of these scores to be 𝑋̅ = 76.6 degrees. You use this to calculate the test statistic, using μ = 74 (the supposed average temperature), σ = 1.00 (how much the temperature should vary), and n = 5 (how many data points you collected):

z = 76.60 − 74.00 = 2.60    = 5.78

          1.00/√5            0.45

This value falls so far into the tail that it cannot even be plotted on the distribution!

Figure 7: Obtained z-statistic

You compare your obtained z-statistic, z = 5.77, to the critical value, z* = 1.645, and find that z > z*. Therefore you reject the null hypothesis, concluding: Based on 5 observations, the average temperature (𝑋̅ = 76.6 degrees) is statistically significantly higher than it is supposed to be, z = 5.77, p < .05.

d = (76.60-74.00)/ 1= 2.60

The effect size you calculate is definitely large, meaning someone has some explaining to do!

Example: Different Significance Level

First, let’s take a look at an example phrased in generic terms, rather than in the context of a specific research question, to see the individual pieces one more time. This time, however, we will use a stricter significance level, α = 0.01, to test the hypothesis.

We will use 60 as an arbitrary null hypothesis value: H 0 : The average score does not differ from the population H 0 : μ = 50

We will assume a two-tailed test: H A : The average score does differ H A : μ ≠ 50

We have seen the critical values for z-tests at α = 0.05 levels of significance several times. To find the values for α = 0.01, we will go to the standard normal table and find the z-score cutting of 0.005 (0.01 divided by 2 for a two-tailed test) of the area in the tail, which is z crit * = ±2.575. Notice that this cutoff is much higher than it was for α = 0.05. This is because we need much less of the area in the tail, so we need to go very far out to find the cutoff. As a result, this will require a much larger effect or much larger sample size in order to reject the null hypothesis.

We can now calculate our test statistic.  The average of 10 scores is M = 60.40 with a µ = 60. We will use σ = 10 as our known population standard deviation. From this information, we calculate our z-statistic as:

Our obtained z-statistic, z = 0.13, is very small. It is much less than our critical value of 2.575. Thus, this time, we fail to reject the null hypothesis. Our conclusion would look something like:

Notice two things about the end of the conclusion. First, we wrote that p is greater than instead of p is less than, like we did in the previous two examples. This is because we failed to reject the null hypothesis. We don’t know exactly what the p- value is, but we know it must be larger than the α level we used to test our hypothesis. Second, we used 0.01 instead of the usual 0.05, because this time we tested at a different level. The number you compare to the p-value should always be the significance level you test at. Because we did not detect a statistically significant effect, we do not need to calculate an effect size. Note: some statisticians will suggest to always calculate effects size as a possibility of Type II error. Although insignificant, calculating d = (60.4-60)/10 = .04 which suggests no effect (and not a possibility of Type II error).

Review Considerations in Hypothesis Testing

Errors in hypothesis testing.

Keep in mind that rejecting the null hypothesis is not an all-or-nothing decision. The Type I error rate is affected by the α level: the lower the α level the lower the Type I error rate. It might seem that α is the probability of a Type I error. However, this is not correct. Instead, α is the probability of a Type I error given that the null hypothesis is true. If the null hypothesis is false, then it is impossible to make a Type I error. The second type of error that can be made in significance testing is failing to reject a false null hypothesis. This kind of error is called a Type II error.

Statistical Power

The statistical power of a research design is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis given the sample size and expected relationship strength. Statistical power is the complement of the probability of committing a Type II error. Clearly, researchers should be interested in the power of their research designs if they want to avoid making Type II errors. In particular, they should make sure their research design has adequate power before collecting data. A common guideline is that a power of .80 is adequate. This means that there is an 80% chance of rejecting the null hypothesis for the expected relationship strength.

Given that statistical power depends primarily on relationship strength and sample size, there are essentially two steps you can take to increase statistical power: increase the strength of the relationship or increase the sample size. Increasing the strength of the relationship can sometimes be accomplished by using a stronger manipulation or by more carefully controlling extraneous variables to reduce the amount of noise in the data (e.g., by using a within-subjects design rather than a between-subjects design). The usual strategy, however, is to increase the sample size. For any expected relationship strength, there will always be some sample large enough to achieve adequate power.

Inferential statistics uses data from a sample of individuals to reach conclusions about the whole population. The degree to which our inferences are valid depends upon how we selected the sample (sampling technique) and the characteristics (parameters) of population data. Statistical analyses assume that sample(s) and population(s) meet certain conditions called statistical assumptions.

It is easy to check assumptions when using statistical software and it is important as a researcher to check for violations; if violations of statistical assumptions are not appropriately addressed then results may be interpreted incorrectly.

Learning Objectives

Having read the chapter, students should be able to:

• Conduct a hypothesis test using a z-score statistics, locating critical region, and make a statistical decision including.
• Explain the purpose of measuring effect size and power, and be able to compute Cohen’s d.

Exercises – Ch. 10

• List the main steps for hypothesis testing with the z-statistic. When and why do you calculate an effect size?
• z = 1.99, two-tailed test at α = 0.05
• z = 1.99, two-tailed test at α = 0.01
• z = 1.99, one-tailed test at α = 0.05
• You are part of a trivia team and have tracked your team’s performance since you started playing, so you know that your scores are normally distributed with μ = 78 and σ = 12. Recently, a new person joined the team, and you think the scores have gotten better. Use hypothesis testing to see if the average score has improved based on the following 8 weeks’ worth of score data: 82, 74, 62, 68, 79, 94, 90, 81, 80.
• A study examines self-esteem and depression in teenagers.  A sample of 25 teens with a low self-esteem are given the Beck Depression Inventory.  The average score for the group is 20.9.  For the general population, the average score is 18.3 with σ = 12.  Use a two-tail test with α = 0.05 to examine whether teenagers with low self-esteem show significant differences in depression.
• You get hired as a server at a local restaurant, and the manager tells you that servers’ tips are $42 on average but vary about $12 (μ = 42, σ = 12). You decide to track your tips to see if you make a different amount, but because this is your first job as a server, you don’t know if you will make more or less in tips. After working 16 shifts, you find that your average nightly amount is $44.50 from tips. Test for a difference between this value and the population mean at the α = 0.05 level of significance.

Answers to Odd- Numbered Exercises – Ch. 10

1. List hypotheses. Determine critical region. Calculate z.  Compare z to critical region. Draw Conclusion.  We calculate an effect size when we find a statistically significant result to see if our result is practically meaningful or important

5. Step 1: H 0 : μ = 42 “My average tips does not differ from other servers”, H A : μ ≠ 42 “My average tips do differ from others”

Introduction to Statistics for Psychology Copyright © 2021 by Alisa Beyer is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis

6 hypothesis testing: the z-test.

We’ve all had the experience of standing at a crosswalk waiting staring at a pedestrian traffic light showing the little red man. You’re waiting for the little green man so you can cross. After a little while you’re still waiting and there aren’t any cars around. You might think ‘this light is really taking a long time’, but you continue waiting. Minutes pass and there’s still no little green man. At some point you come to the conclusion that the light is broken and you’ll never see that little green man. You cross on the little red man when it’s clear.

You may not have known this but you just conducted a hypothesis test. When you arrived at the crosswalk, you assumed that the light was functioning properly, although you will always entertain the possibility that it’s broken. In terms of hypothesis testing, your ‘null hypothesis’ is that the light is working and your ‘alternative hypothesis’ is that it’s broken. As time passes, it seems less and less likely that light is working properly. Eventually, the probability of the light working given how long you’ve been waiting becomes so low that you reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis.

This sort of reasoning is the backbone of hypothesis testing and inferential statistics. It’s also the point in the course where we turn the corner from descriptive statistics to inferential statistics. Rather than describing our data in terms of means and plots, we will now start using our data to make inferences, or generalizations, about the population that our samples are drawn from. In this course we’ll focus on standard hypothesis testing where we set up a null hypothesis and determine the probability of our observed data under the assumption that the null hypothesis is true (the much maligned p-value). If this probability is small enough, then we conclude that our data suggests that the null hypothesis is false, so we reject it.

In this chapter, we’ll introduce hypothesis testing with examples from a ‘z-test’, when we’re comparing a single mean to what we’d expect from a population with known mean and standard deviation. In this case, we can convert our observed mean into a z-score for the standard normal distribution. Hence the name z-test.

It’s time to introduce the hypothesis test flow chart . It’s pretty self explanatory, even if you’re not familiar with all of these hypothesis tests. The z-test is (1) based on means, (2) with only one mean, and (3) where we know \(\sigma\) , the standard deviation of the population. Here’s how to find the z-test in the flow chart:

6.1 Women’s height example

Let’s work with the example from the end of the last chapter where we started with the fact that the heights of US women has a mean of 63 and a standard deviation of 2.5 inches. We calculated that the average height of the 122 women in Psych 315 is 64.7 inches. We then used the central limit theorem and calculated the probability of a random sample 122 heights from this population having a mean of 64.7 or greater is 2.4868996^{-14}. This is a very, very small number.

Here’s how we do it using R:

Let’s think of our sample as a random sample of UW psychology students, which is a reasonable assumption since all psychology students have to take a statistics class. What does this sample say about the psychology students that are women at UW compared to the US population? It could be that these psychology students at UW have the same mean and standard deviation as the US population, but our sample just happens to have an unusual number of tall women, but we calculated that the probability of this happening is really low. Instead, it makes more sense that the population that we’re drawing from has a mean that’s greater than the US population mean. Notice that we’re making a conclusion about the whole population of women psychology students based on our one sample.

Using the terminology of hypothesis testing, we first assumed the null hypothesis that UW women psych students have the same mean (and standard deviation) as the US population. The null hypothesis is written as:

\[ H_{0}: \mu = 63 \] In this example, our alternative hypothesis is that the mean of our population is larger than the mean of null hypothesis population. We write this as:

\[ H_{A}: \mu > 63 \]

Next, after obtaining a random sample and calculate the mean, we calculate the probability of drawing a mean this large (or larger) from the null hypothesis distribution.

If this probability is low enough, we reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. When our probability allows us to reject the null hypothesis, we say that our observed results are ‘statistically significant’.

In statistics terms, we never say we ‘accept that alternative hypothesis’ as true. All we can say is that we don’t think the null hypothesis is true. I know it’s subtle, but in science can never prove that a hypothesis is true or not. There’s always the possibility that we just happened to grab an unusual sample from the null hypothesis distribution.

6.2 The hated p<.05

The probability that we obtain our observed mean or greater given that the null hypothesis is true is called the p-value. How improbable is improbable enough to reject the null hypothesis? The p-value for our example above on women’s heights is astronomically low, so it’s clear that we should reject \(H_{0}\) .

The p-value that’s on the border of rejection is called the alpha ( \(\alpha\) ) value. We reject \(H_{0}\) when our p-value is less than \(\alpha\) .

You probably know that the most common value of alpha is \(\alpha = .05\) .

The first publication of this value dates back to Sir Ronald Fisher, in his seminal 1925 book Statistical Methods for Research Workers where he states:

“It is convenient to take this point as a limit in judging whether a deviation is considered significant or not. Deviations exceeding twice the standard deviation are thus formally regarded as significant.” (p. 47)

If you read the chapter on the normal distribution, then you should know that 95% of the area under the normal distribution lies within \(\pm\) two standard deviations of the mean. So the probability of obtaining a sample that exceeds two standard deviations from the mean (in either direction) is .05.

6.3 IQ example

Let’s do an example using IQ scores. IQ scores are normalized to have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 points. Because they’re normalized, they are a rare example of a population which has a known mean and standard deviation. In the next chapter we’ll discuss the t-test, which is used in the more common situation when we don’t know the population standard deviation.

Suppose you have the suspicion that graduate students have higher IQ’s than the general population. You have enough time to go and measure the IQ’s of 25 randomly sampled grad students and obtain a mean of 105. Is this difference between our this observed mean and 100 statistically significant using an alpha value of \(\alpha = 0.05\) ?

Here the null hypothesis is:

\[ H_{0}: \mu = 100\]

And the alternative hypothesis is:

\[ H_{A}: \mu > 100 \]

We know that the parameters for the null hypothesis are:

\[ \mu = 100 \] and \[ \sigma = 15 \]

From this, we can calculate the probability of observing our mean of 105 or higher using the central limit theorem and what we know about the normal distribution:

\[ \sigma_{\bar{x}} = \frac{\sigma_{x}}{\sqrt{n}} = \frac{15}{\sqrt{25}} = 3 \] From this, we can calculate the probability of our observed mean using R’s ‘pnorm’ function. Here’s how to do the whole thing in R.

Since our p-value of 0.0478 is (just barely) less than our chosen value of \(\alpha = 0.05\) as our criterion, we reject \(H_{0}\) for this (contrived) example and conclude that our observed mean of 105 is significantly greater than 100, so our study suggests that the average graduate student has a higher IQ than the overall population.

You should feel uncomfortable making such a hard, binary decision for such a borderline case. After all, if we had chosen our second favorite value of alpha, \(\alpha = .01\) , we would have failed to reject \(H_{0}\) . This discomfort is a primary reason why statisticians are moving away from this discrete decision making process. Later on we’ll discuss where things are going, including reporting effect sizes, and using confidence intervals.

6.4 Alpha values vs. critical values

Using R’s qnorm function, we can find the z-score for which only 5% of the area lies above:

So the probability of a randomly sampled z-score exceeding 1.644854 is less than 5%. It follows that if we convert our observed mean into z-score values, we will reject \(H_{0}\) if and only if our z-score is greater than 1.644854. This value is called the ‘critical value’ because it lies on the boundary between rejecting and failing to reject \(H_{0}\) .

In our last example, the z-score for our observed mean is:

\[ z = \frac{X-\mu}{\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}}} = \frac{105 - 100}{3} = 1.67 \] Our z-score is just barely greater than the critical value of 1.644854, which makes sense because our p-value is just barely less than 0.05.

Sometimes you’ll see textbooks will compare critical values to observed scores for the decision making process in hypothesis testing. This dates back to days were computers were less available and we had to rely on tables instead. There wasn’t enough space in a book to hold complete tables which prohibited the ability to look up a p-value for any observed value. Instead only critical values for specific values of alpha were included. If you look at really old papers, you’ll see statistics reported as \(p<.05\) or \(p<.01\) instead of actual p-values for this reason.

It may help to visualize the relationship between p-values, alpha values and critical values like this:

The red shaded region is the upper 5% of the standard normal distribution which starts at the critical value of z=1.644854. This is sometimes called the ‘rejection region’. The blue vertical line is drawn at our observed value of z=1.67. You can see that the red line falls just inside the rejection region, so we Reject \(H_{0}\) !

6.5 One vs. two-tailed tests

Recall that our alternative hypothesis was to reject if our mean IQ was significantly greater than the null hypothesis mean: \(H_{A}: \mu > 100\) . This implies that the situation where \(\mu < 100\) is never even in consideration, which is weird. In science, we’re trying to understand the true state of the world. Although we have a hunch that grad student IQ’s are higher than average, there is always the possibility that they are lower than average. If our sample came up with an IQ well below 100, we’d simply fail to reject \(H_{0}\) and move on. This feels like throwing out important information.

The test we just ran is called a ‘one-tailed’ test because we only reject \(H_{0}\) if our results fall in one of the two tails of the population distribution.

Instead, it might make more sense to reject \(H_{0}\) if we get either an unusually large or small score. This means we need two critical values - one above and one below zero. At first thought you might think we just duplicate our critical value from a one-tailed test to the other side. But will double the area of the rejection region. That’s not a good thing because if \(H_{0}\) is true, there’s actually a \(2\alpha\) probability that we’ll draw a score in the rejection region.

Instead, we divide the area into two tails, each containing an area of \(\frac{\alpha}{2}\) . For \(\alpha\) = 0.05, we can find the critical value of z with qnorm:

So with a two-tailed test at \(\alpha = 0.05\) we reject \(H_{0}\) if our observed z-score is either above z = 1.96 or less than -1.96. This is that value around 2 that Sir Ronald Fischer was talking about!

Here’s what the critical regions and observed value of z looks like for our example with a two-tailed test:

You can see that splitting the area of \(\alpha = 0.05\) into two halves increased the critical value in the positive direction from 1.64 to 1.96, making it harder to reject \(H_{0}\) . For our example, this changes our decision: our observed value of z = 1.67 no longer falls into the rejection region, so now we fail to reject \(H_{0}\) .

If we now fail to reject \(H_{0}\) , what about the p-value? Remember, for a one-tailed test, p = \(\alpha\) if our observed z-score lands right on the critical value of z. The same is true for a two-tailed test. But the z-score moved so that the area above that score is \(\frac{\alpha}{2}\) . So for a two-tailed test, in order to have a p-value of \(\alpha\) when our z-score lands right on the critical value, we need to double p-value hat we’d get for a one-tailed test.

For our example, the p-value for the one tailed test was \(p=0.0478\) . So if we use a two-tailed test, our p-value is \((2)(0.0478) = 0.0956\) . This value is greater than \(\alpha\) = 0.05, which makes sense because we just showed above that we fail to reject \(H_{0}\) with a two tailed test.

Which is the right test, one-tailed or two-tailed? Ideally, as scientists, we should be agnostic about the results of our experiment. But in reality, we all know that the results are more interesting if they are statistically significant. So you can imagine that for this example, given a choice between one and two-tailed, we’d choose a one-tailed test so that we can reject \(H_{0}\) .

There are two problems with this. First, we should never adjust our choice of hypothesis test after we observe the data. That would be an example of ‘p-hacking’, a topic we’ll discuss later. Second, most statisticians these days strongly recommend against one-tailed tests. The only reason for a one-tailed test is if there is no logical or physical possibility for a population mean to fall below the null hypothesis mean.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

7 Chapter 7: Introduction to Hypothesis Testing

alternative hypothesis

critical value

effect size

null hypothesis

probability value

rejection region

significance level

statistical power

statistical significance

test statistic

Type I error

Type II error

This chapter lays out the basic logic and process of hypothesis testing. We will perform z  tests, which use the z  score formula from Chapter 6 and data from a sample mean to make an inference about a population.

Logic and Purpose of Hypothesis Testing

A hypothesis is a prediction that is tested in a research study. The statistician R. A. Fisher explained the concept of hypothesis testing with a story of a lady tasting tea. Here we will present an example based on James Bond who insisted that martinis should be shaken rather than stirred. Let’s consider a hypothetical experiment to determine whether Mr. Bond can tell the difference between a shaken martini and a stirred martini. Suppose we gave Mr. Bond a series of 16 taste tests. In each test, we flipped a fair coin to determine whether to stir or shake the martini. Then we presented the martini to Mr. Bond and asked him to decide whether it was shaken or stirred. Let’s say Mr. Bond was correct on 13 of the 16 taste tests. Does this prove that Mr. Bond has at least some ability to tell whether the martini was shaken or stirred?

This result does not prove that he does; it could be he was just lucky and guessed right 13 out of 16 times. But how plausible is the explanation that he was just lucky? To assess its plausibility, we determine the probability that someone who was just guessing would be correct 13/16 times or more. This probability can be computed to be .0106. This is a pretty low probability, and therefore someone would have to be very lucky to be correct 13 or more times out of 16 if they were just guessing. So either Mr. Bond was very lucky, or he can tell whether the drink was shaken or stirred. The hypothesis that he was guessing is not proven false, but considerable doubt is cast on it. Therefore, there is strong evidence that Mr. Bond can tell whether a drink was shaken or stirred.

Let’s consider another example. The case study Physicians’ Reactions sought to determine whether physicians spend less time with obese patients. Physicians were sampled randomly and each was shown a chart of a patient complaining of a migraine headache. They were then asked to estimate how long they would spend with the patient. The charts were identical except that for half the charts, the patient was obese and for the other half, the patient was of average weight. The chart a particular physician viewed was determined randomly. Thirty-three physicians viewed charts of average-weight patients and 38 physicians viewed charts of obese patients.

The mean time physicians reported that they would spend with obese patients was 24.7 minutes as compared to a mean of 31.4 minutes for normal-weight patients. How might this difference between means have occurred? One possibility is that physicians were influenced by the weight of the patients. On the other hand, perhaps by chance, the physicians who viewed charts of the obese patients tend to see patients for less time than the other physicians. Random assignment of charts does not ensure that the groups will be equal in all respects other than the chart they viewed. In fact, it is certain the groups differed in many ways by chance. The two groups could not have exactly the same mean age (if measured precisely enough such as in days). Perhaps a physician’s age affects how long the physician sees patients. There are innumerable differences between the groups that could affect how long they view patients. With this in mind, is it plausible that these chance differences are responsible for the difference in times?

To assess the plausibility of the hypothesis that the difference in mean times is due to chance, we compute the probability of getting a difference as large or larger than the observed difference (31.4 − 24.7 = 6.7 minutes) if the difference were, in fact, due solely to chance. Using methods presented in later chapters, this probability can be computed to be .0057. Since this is such a low probability, we have confidence that the difference in times is due to the patient’s weight and is not due to chance.

The Probability Value

It is very important to understand precisely what the probability values mean. In the James Bond example, the computed probability of .0106 is the probability he would be correct on 13 or more taste tests (out of 16) if he were just guessing. It is easy to mistake this probability of .0106 as the probability he cannot tell the difference. This is not at all what it means.

The probability of .0106 is the probability of a certain outcome (13 or more out of 16) assuming a certain state of the world (James Bond was only guessing). It is not the probability that a state of the world is true. Although this might seem like a distinction without a difference, consider the following example. An animal trainer claims that a trained bird can determine whether or not numbers are evenly divisible by 7. In an experiment assessing this claim, the bird is given a series of 16 test trials. On each trial, a number is displayed on a screen and the bird pecks at one of two keys to indicate its choice. The numbers are chosen in such a way that the probability of any number being evenly divisible by 7 is .50. The bird is correct on 9/16 choices. We can compute that the probability of being correct nine or more times out of 16 if one is only guessing is .40. Since a bird who is only guessing would do this well 40% of the time, these data do not provide convincing evidence that the bird can tell the difference between the two types of numbers. As a scientist, you would be very skeptical that the bird had this ability. Would you conclude that there is a .40 probability that the bird can tell the difference? Certainly not! You would think the probability is much lower than .0001.

To reiterate, the probability value is the probability of an outcome (9/16 or better) and not the probability of a particular state of the world (the bird was only guessing). In statistics, it is conventional to refer to possible states of the world as hypotheses since they are hypothesized states of the world. Using this terminology, the probability value is the probability of an outcome given the hypothesis. It is not the probability of the hypothesis given the outcome.

This is not to say that we ignore the probability of the hypothesis. If the probability of the outcome given the hypothesis is sufficiently low, we have evidence that the hypothesis is false. However, we do not compute the probability that the hypothesis is false. In the James Bond example, the hypothesis is that he cannot tell the difference between shaken and stirred martinis. The probability value is low (.0106), thus providing evidence that he can tell the difference. However, we have not computed the probability that he can tell the difference.

The Null Hypothesis

The hypothesis that an apparent effect is due to chance is called the null hypothesis , written H 0 (“ H -naught”). In the Physicians’ Reactions example, the null hypothesis is that in the population of physicians, the mean time expected to be spent with obese patients is equal to the mean time expected to be spent with average-weight patients. This null hypothesis can be written as:

The null hypothesis in a correlational study of the relationship between high school grades and college grades would typically be that the population correlation is 0. This can be written as

Although the null hypothesis is usually that the value of a parameter is 0, there are occasions in which the null hypothesis is a value other than 0. For example, if we are working with mothers in the U.S. whose children are at risk of low birth weight, we can use 7.47 pounds, the average birth weight in the U.S., as our null value and test for differences against that.

For now, we will focus on testing a value of a single mean against what we expect from the population. Using birth weight as an example, our null hypothesis takes the form:

Keep in mind that the null hypothesis is typically the opposite of the researcher’s hypothesis. In the Physicians’ Reactions study, the researchers hypothesized that physicians would expect to spend less time with obese patients. The null hypothesis that the two types of patients are treated identically is put forward with the hope that it can be discredited and therefore rejected. If the null hypothesis were true, a difference as large as or larger than the sample difference of 6.7 minutes would be very unlikely to occur. Therefore, the researchers rejected the null hypothesis of no difference and concluded that in the population, physicians intend to spend less time with obese patients.

In general, the null hypothesis is the idea that nothing is going on: there is no effect of our treatment, no relationship between our variables, and no difference in our sample mean from what we expected about the population mean. This is always our baseline starting assumption, and it is what we seek to reject. If we are trying to treat depression, we want to find a difference in average symptoms between our treatment and control groups. If we are trying to predict job performance, we want to find a relationship between conscientiousness and evaluation scores. However, until we have evidence against it, we must use the null hypothesis as our starting point.

The Alternative Hypothesis

If the null hypothesis is rejected, then we will need some other explanation, which we call the alternative hypothesis, H A or H 1 . The alternative hypothesis is simply the reverse of the null hypothesis, and there are three options, depending on where we expect the difference to lie. Thus, our alternative hypothesis is the mathematical way of stating our research question. If we expect our obtained sample mean to be above or below the null hypothesis value, which we call a directional hypothesis, then our alternative hypothesis takes the form

based on the research question itself. We should only use a directional hypothesis if we have good reason, based on prior observations or research, to suspect a particular direction. When we do not know the direction, such as when we are entering a new area of research, we use a non-directional alternative:

We will set different criteria for rejecting the null hypothesis based on the directionality (greater than, less than, or not equal to) of the alternative. To understand why, we need to see where our criteria come from and how they relate to z  scores and distributions.

Critical Values, p Values, and Significance Level

The significance level is a threshold we set before collecting data in order to determine whether or not we should reject the null hypothesis. We set this value beforehand to avoid biasing ourselves by viewing our results and then determining what criteria we should use. If our data produce values that meet or exceed this threshold, then we have sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis; if not, we fail to reject the null (we never “accept” the null).

Figure 7.1. The rejection region for a one-tailed test. (“ Rejection Region for One-Tailed Test ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

The rejection region is bounded by a specific z  value, as is any area under the curve. In hypothesis testing, the value corresponding to a specific rejection region is called the critical value , z crit  (“ z  crit”), or z * (hence the other name “critical region”). Finding the critical value works exactly the same as finding the z  score corresponding to any area under the curve as we did in Unit 1 . If we go to the normal table, we will find that the z  score corresponding to 5% of the area under the curve is equal to 1.645 ( z = 1.64 corresponds to .0505 and z = 1.65 corresponds to .0495, so .05 is exactly in between them) if we go to the right and −1.645 if we go to the left. The direction must be determined by your alternative hypothesis, and drawing and shading the distribution is helpful for keeping directionality straight.

Suppose, however, that we want to do a non-directional test. We need to put the critical region in both tails, but we don’t want to increase the overall size of the rejection region (for reasons we will see later). To do this, we simply split it in half so that an equal proportion of the area under the curve falls in each tail’s rejection region. For a = .05, this means 2.5% of the area is in each tail, which, based on the z  table, corresponds to critical values of z * = ±1.96. This is shown in Figure 7.2 .

Figure 7.2. Two-tailed rejection region. (“ Rejection Region for Two-Tailed Test ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

Thus, any z  score falling outside ±1.96 (greater than 1.96 in absolute value) falls in the rejection region. When we use z  scores in this way, the obtained value of z (sometimes called z  obtained and abbreviated z obt ) is something known as a test statistic , which is simply an inferential statistic used to test a null hypothesis. The formula for our z  statistic has not changed:

Figure 7.3. Relationship between a , z obt , and p . (“ Relationship between alpha, z-obt, and p ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

When the null hypothesis is rejected, the effect is said to have statistical significance , or be statistically significant. For example, in the Physicians’ Reactions case study, the probability value is .0057. Therefore, the effect of obesity is statistically significant and the null hypothesis that obesity makes no difference is rejected. It is important to keep in mind that statistical significance means only that the null hypothesis of exactly no effect is rejected; it does not mean that the effect is important, which is what “significant” usually means. When an effect is significant, you can have confidence the effect is not exactly zero. Finding that an effect is significant does not tell you about how large or important the effect is.

Do not confuse statistical significance with practical significance. A small effect can be highly significant if the sample size is large enough.

Why does the word “significant” in the phrase “statistically significant” mean something so different from other uses of the word? Interestingly, this is because the meaning of “significant” in everyday language has changed. It turns out that when the procedures for hypothesis testing were developed, something was “significant” if it signified something. Thus, finding that an effect is statistically significant signifies that the effect is real and not due to chance. Over the years, the meaning of “significant” changed, leading to the potential misinterpretation.

The Hypothesis Testing Process

A four-step procedure.

The process of testing hypotheses follows a simple four-step procedure. This process will be what we use for the remainder of the textbook and course, and although the hypothesis and statistics we use will change, this process will not.

Step 1: State the Hypotheses

Your hypotheses are the first thing you need to lay out. Otherwise, there is nothing to test! You have to state the null hypothesis (which is what we test) and the alternative hypothesis (which is what we expect). These should be stated mathematically as they were presented above and in words, explaining in normal English what each one means in terms of the research question.

Step 2: Find the Critical Values

Step 3: calculate the test statistic and effect size.

Once we have our hypotheses and the standards we use to test them, we can collect data and calculate our test statistic—in this case z . This step is where the vast majority of differences in future chapters will arise: different tests used for different data are calculated in different ways, but the way we use and interpret them remains the same. As part of this step, we will also calculate effect size to better quantify the magnitude of the difference between our groups. Although effect size is not considered part of hypothesis testing, reporting it as part of the results is approved convention.

Step 4: Make the Decision

Finally, once we have our obtained test statistic, we can compare it to our critical value and decide whether we should reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis. When we do this, we must interpret the decision in relation to our research question, stating what we concluded, what we based our conclusion on, and the specific statistics we obtained.

Example A Movie Popcorn

Our manager is looking for a difference in the mean weight of popcorn bags compared to the population mean of 8. We will need both a null and an alternative hypothesis written both mathematically and in words. We’ll always start with the null hypothesis:

In this case, we don’t know if the bags will be too full or not full enough, so we do a two-tailed alternative hypothesis that there is a difference.

Our critical values are based on two things: the directionality of the test and the level of significance. We decided in Step 1 that a two-tailed test is the appropriate directionality. We were given no information about the level of significance, so we assume that a = .05 is what we will use. As stated earlier in the chapter, the critical values for a two-tailed z  test at a = .05 are z * = ±1.96. This will be the criteria we use to test our hypothesis. We can now draw out our distribution, as shown in Figure 7.4 , so we can visualize the rejection region and make sure it makes sense.

Figure 7.4. Rejection region for z * = ±1.96. (“ Rejection Region z+-1.96 ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

Now we come to our formal calculations. Let’s say that the manager collects data and finds that the average weight of this employee’s popcorn bags is M = 7.75 cups. We can now plug this value, along with the values presented in the original problem, into our equation for z :

So our test statistic is z = −2.50, which we can draw onto our rejection region distribution as shown in Figure 7.5 .

Figure 7.5. Test statistic location. (“ Test Statistic Location z-2.50 ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

Effect Size

When we reject the null hypothesis, we are stating that the difference we found was statistically significant, but we have mentioned several times that this tells us nothing about practical significance. To get an idea of the actual size of what we found, we can compute a new statistic called an effect size. Effect size gives us an idea of how large, important, or meaningful a statistically significant effect is. For mean differences like we calculated here, our effect size is Cohen’s d :

This is very similar to our formula for z , but we no longer take into account the sample size (since overly large samples can make it too easy to reject the null). Cohen’s d is interpreted in units of standard deviations, just like z . For our example:

Cohen’s d is interpreted as small, moderate, or large. Specifically, d = 0.20 is small, d = 0.50 is moderate, and d = 0.80 is large. Obviously, values can fall in between these guidelines, so we should use our best judgment and the context of the problem to make our final interpretation of size. Our effect size happens to be exactly equal to one of these, so we say that there is a moderate effect.

Effect sizes are incredibly useful and provide important information and clarification that overcomes some of the weakness of hypothesis testing. Any time you perform a hypothesis test, whether statistically significant or not, you should always calculate and report effect size.

Looking at Figure 7.5 , we can see that our obtained z  statistic falls in the rejection region. We can also directly compare it to our critical value: in terms of absolute value, −2.50 > −1.96, so we reject the null hypothesis. We can now write our conclusion:

Reject H 0 . Based on the sample of 25 bags, we can conclude that the average popcorn bag from this employee is smaller ( M = 7.75 cups) than the average weight of popcorn bags at this movie theater, and the effect size was moderate, z = −2.50, p < .05, d = 0.50.

Example B Office Temperature

Let’s do another example to solidify our understanding. Let’s say that the office building you work in is supposed to be kept at 74 degrees Fahrenheit during the summer months but is allowed to vary by 1 degree in either direction. You suspect that, as a cost saving measure, the temperature was secretly set higher. You set up a formal way to test your hypothesis.

You start by laying out the null hypothesis:

Next you state the alternative hypothesis. You have reason to suspect a specific direction of change, so you make a one-tailed test:

You know that the most common level of significance is a  = .05, so you keep that the same and know that the critical value for a one-tailed z  test is z * = 1.645. To keep track of the directionality of the test and rejection region, you draw out your distribution as shown in Figure 7.6 .

Figure 7.6. Rejection region. (“ Rejection Region z1.645 ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

Now that you have everything set up, you spend one week collecting temperature data:

This value falls so far into the tail that it cannot even be plotted on the distribution ( Figure 7.7 )! Because the result is significant, you also calculate an effect size:

The effect size you calculate is definitely large, meaning someone has some explaining to do!

Figure 7.7. Obtained z statistic. (“ Obtained z5.77 ” by Judy Schmitt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .)

You compare your obtained z  statistic, z = 5.77, to the critical value, z * = 1.645, and find that z > z *. Therefore you reject the null hypothesis, concluding:

Reject H 0 . Based on 5 observations, the average temperature ( M = 76.6 degrees) is statistically significantly higher than it is supposed to be, and the effect size was large, z = 5.77, p < .05, d = 2.60.

Example C Different Significance Level

Finally, let’s take a look at an example phrased in generic terms, rather than in the context of a specific research question, to see the individual pieces one more time. This time, however, we will use a stricter significance level, a = .01, to test the hypothesis.

We will use 60 as an arbitrary null hypothesis value:

We will assume a two-tailed test:

We have seen the critical values for z  tests at a = .05 levels of significance several times. To find the values for a = .01, we will go to the Standard Normal Distribution Table and find the z  score cutting off .005 (.01 divided by 2 for a two-tailed test) of the area in the tail, which is z * = ±2.575. Notice that this cutoff is much higher than it was for a = .05. This is because we need much less of the area in the tail, so we need to go very far out to find the cutoff. As a result, this will require a much larger effect or much larger sample size in order to reject the null hypothesis.

We can now calculate our test statistic. We will use s = 10 as our known population standard deviation and the following data to calculate our sample mean:

The average of these scores is M = 60.40. From this we calculate our z  statistic as:

The Cohen’s d effect size calculation is:

Our obtained z  statistic, z = 0.13, is very small. It is much less than our critical value of 2.575. Thus, this time, we fail to reject the null hypothesis. Our conclusion would look something like:

Fail to reject H 0 . Based on the sample of 10 scores, we cannot conclude that there is an effect causing the mean ( M  = 60.40) to be statistically significantly different from 60.00, z = 0.13, p > .01, d = 0.04, and the effect size supports this interpretation.

Other Considerations in Hypothesis Testing

There are several other considerations we need to keep in mind when performing hypothesis testing.

Errors in Hypothesis Testing

In the Physicians’ Reactions case study, the probability value associated with the significance test is .0057. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected, and it was concluded that physicians intend to spend less time with obese patients. Despite the low probability value, it is possible that the null hypothesis of no true difference between obese and average-weight patients is true and that the large difference between sample means occurred by chance. If this is the case, then the conclusion that physicians intend to spend less time with obese patients is in error. This type of error is called a Type I error. More generally, a Type I error occurs when a significance test results in the rejection of a true null hypothesis.

The second type of error that can be made in significance testing is failing to reject a false null hypothesis. This kind of error is called a Type II error . Unlike a Type I error, a Type II error is not really an error. When a statistical test is not significant, it means that the data do not provide strong evidence that the null hypothesis is false. Lack of significance does not support the conclusion that the null hypothesis is true. Therefore, a researcher should not make the mistake of incorrectly concluding that the null hypothesis is true when a statistical test was not significant. Instead, the researcher should consider the test inconclusive. Contrast this with a Type I error in which the researcher erroneously concludes that the null hypothesis is false when, in fact, it is true.

A Type II error can only occur if the null hypothesis is false. If the null hypothesis is false, then the probability of a Type II error is called b (“beta”). The probability of correctly rejecting a false null hypothesis equals 1 − b and is called statistical power . Power is simply our ability to correctly detect an effect that exists. It is influenced by the size of the effect (larger effects are easier to detect), the significance level we set (making it easier to reject the null makes it easier to detect an effect, but increases the likelihood of a Type I error), and the sample size used (larger samples make it easier to reject the null).

Misconceptions in Hypothesis Testing

Misconceptions about significance testing are common. This section lists three important ones.

• Misconception: The probability value ( p value) is the probability that the null hypothesis is false. Proper interpretation: The probability value ( p value) is the probability of a result as extreme or more extreme given that the null hypothesis is true. It is the probability of the data given the null hypothesis. It is not the probability that the null hypothesis is false.
• Misconception: A low probability value indicates a large effect. Proper interpretation: A low probability value indicates that the sample outcome (or an outcome more extreme) would be very unlikely if the null hypothesis were true. A low probability value can occur with small effect sizes, particularly if the sample size is large.
• Misconception: A non-significant outcome means that the null hypothesis is probably true. Proper interpretation: A non-significant outcome means that the data do not conclusively demonstrate that the null hypothesis is false.
• In your own words, explain what the null hypothesis is.
• What are Type I and Type II errors?
• Why do we phrase null and alternative hypotheses with population parameters and not sample means?
• Why do we state our hypotheses and decision criteria before we collect our data?
• Why do you calculate an effect size?
• z = 1.99, two-tailed test at a = .05
• z = 0.34, z * = 1.645
• p = .03, a = .05
• p = .015, a = .01

Answers to Odd-Numbered Exercises

Your answer should include mention of the baseline assumption of no difference between the sample and the population.

Alpha is the significance level. It is the criterion we use when deciding to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis, corresponding to a given proportion of the area under the normal distribution and a probability of finding extreme scores assuming the null hypothesis is true.

We always calculate an effect size to see if our research is practically meaningful or important. NHST (null hypothesis significance testing) is influenced by sample size but effect size is not; therefore, they provide complimentary information.

“ Null Hypothesis ” by Randall Munroe/xkcd.com is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.5 .)

Introduction to Statistics in the Psychological Sciences Copyright © 2021 by Linda R. Cote Ph.D.; Rupa G. Gordon Ph.D.; Chrislyn E. Randell Ph.D.; Judy Schmitt; and Helena Marvin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Hypothesis Testing with Z-Test: Significance Level and Rejection Region

Join over 2 million students who advanced their careers with 365 Data Science. Learn from instructors who have worked at Meta, Spotify, Google, IKEA, Netflix, and Coca-Cola and master Python, SQL, Excel, machine learning, data analysis, AI fundamentals, and more.

If you want to understand why hypothesis testing works, you should first have an idea about the significance level and the reject region . We assume you already know what a hypothesis is , so let’s jump right into the action.

What Is the Significance Level?

First, we must define the term significance level .

Normally, we aim to reject the null if it is false.

However, as with any test, there is a small chance that we could get it wrong and reject a null hypothesis that is true.

How Is the Significance Level Denoted?

The significance level is denoted by α and is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis , if it is true.

So, the probability of making this error.

Typical values for α are 0.01, 0.05 and 0.1. It is a value that we select based on the certainty we need. In most cases, the choice of α is determined by the context we are operating in, but 0.05 is the most commonly used value.

A Case in Point

Say, we need to test if a machine is working properly. We would expect the test to make little or no mistakes. As we want to be very precise, we should pick a low significance level such as 0.01.

The famous Coca Cola glass bottle is 12 ounces. If the machine pours 12.1 ounces, some of the liquid would be spilled, and the label would be damaged as well. So, in certain situations, we need to be as accurate as possible.

Higher Degree of Error

However, if we are analyzing humans or companies, we would expect more random or at least uncertain behavior. Hence, a higher degree of error.

For instance, if we want to predict how much Coca Cola its consumers drink on average, the difference between 12 ounces and 12.1 ounces will not be that crucial. So, we can choose a higher significance level like 0.05 or 0.1.

Hypothesis Testing: Performing a Z-Test

Now that we have an idea about the significance level , let’s get to the mechanics of hypothesis testing.

Imagine you are consulting a university and want to carry out an analysis on how students are performing on average.

The university dean believes that on average students have a GPA of 70%. Being the data-driven researcher that you are, you can’t simply agree with his opinion, so you start testing.

The null hypothesis is: The population mean grade is 70%.

This is a hypothesized value.

The alternative hypothesis is: The population mean grade is not 70%. You can see how both of them are denoted, below.

Visualizing the Grades

Assuming that the population of grades is normally distributed, all grades received by students should look in the following way.

That is the true population mean .

Performing a Z-test

Now, a test we would normally perform is the Z-test . The formula is:

Z equals the sample mean , minus the hypothesized mean , divided by the standard error .

The idea is the following.

We are standardizing or scaling the sample mean we got. (You can quickly obtain it with our Mean, Median, Mode calculator .) If the sample mean is close enough to the hypothesized mean , then Z will be close to 0. Otherwise, it will be far away from it. Naturally, if the sample mean is exactly equal to the hypothesized mean , Z will be 0.

In all these cases, we would accept the null hypothesis .

What Is the Rejection Region?

The question here is the following:

How big should Z be for us to reject the null hypothesis ?

Well, there is a cut-off line. Since we are conducting a two-sided or a two-tailed test, there are two cut-off lines, one on each side.

When we calculate Z , we will get a value. If this value falls into the middle part, then we cannot reject the null. If it falls outside, in the shaded region, then we reject the null hypothesis .

That is why the shaded part is called: rejection region , as you can see below.

What Does the Rejection Region Depend on?

The area that is cut-off actually depends on the significance level .

Say the level of significance , α , is 0.05. Then we have α divided by 2, or 0.025 on the left side and 0.025 on the right side.

Now these are values we can check from the z-table . When α is 0.025, Z is 1.96. So, 1.96 on the right side and minus 1.96 on the left side.

Therefore, if the value we get for Z from the test is lower than minus 1.96, or higher than 1.96, we will reject the null hypothesis . Otherwise, we will accept it.

That’s more or less how hypothesis testing works.

We scale the sample mean with respect to the hypothesized value. If Z is close to 0, then we cannot reject the null. If it is far away from 0, then we reject the null hypothesis .

Example of One Tailed Test

What about one-sided tests? We have those too!

Let’s consider the following situation.

Paul says data scientists earn more than $125,000. So, H 0 is: μ 0 is bigger than $125,000.

The alternative is that μ 0 is lower or equal to 125,000.

Using the same significance level , this time, the whole rejection region is on the left. So, the rejection region has an area of α . Looking at the z-table, that corresponds to a Z -score of 1.645. Since it is on the left, it is with a minus sign.

Accept or Reject

Now, when calculating our test statistic Z , if we get a value lower than -1.645, we would reject the null hypothesis . We do that because we have statistical evidence that the data scientist salary is less than $125,000. Otherwise, we would accept it.

Another One-Tailed Test

To exhaust all possibilities, let’s explore another one-tailed test.

Say the university dean told you that the average GPA students get is lower than 70%. In that case, the null hypothesis is:

μ 0 is lower than 70%.

While the alternative is:

μ 0` is bigger or equal to 70%.

In this situation, the rejection region is on the right side. So, if the test statistic is bigger than the cut-off z-score, we would reject the null, otherwise, we wouldn’t.

Importance of the Significance Level and the Rejection Region

To sum up, the significance level and the reject region are quite crucial in the process of hypothesis testing. The level of significance conducts the accuracy of prediction. We (the researchers) choose it depending on how big of a difference a possible error could make. On the other hand, the reject region helps us decide whether or not to reject the null hypothesis . After reading this and putting both of them into use, you will realize how convenient they make your work.

Interested in taking your skills from good to great? Try statistics course for free !

Next Tutorial:  Providing a Few Linear Regression Examples

World-Class

Data Science

Learn with instructors from:

Iliya Valchanov

Co-founder of 365 Data Science

Iliya is a finance graduate with a strong quantitative background who chose the exciting path of a startup entrepreneur. He demonstrated a formidable affinity for numbers during his childhood, winning more than 90 national and international awards and competitions through the years. Iliya started teaching at university, helping other students learn statistics and econometrics. Inspired by his first happy students, he co-founded 365 Data Science to continue spreading knowledge. He authored several of the program’s online courses in mathematics, statistics, machine learning, and deep learning.

We Think you'll also like

Statistics Tutorials

Hypothesis Testing: Null Hypothesis and Alternative Hypothesis

False Positive vs. False Negative: Type I and Type II Errors in Statistical Hypothesis Testing

Calculating and Using Covariance and Linear Correlation Coefficient

Getting Familiar with the Central Limit Theorem and the Standard Error

Hypothesis Testing for Means & Proportions

•   1  
• |   2  
• |   3  
• |   4  
• |   5  
• |   6  
• |   7  
• |   8  
• |   9  
• |   10  

Hypothesis Testing: Upper-, Lower, and Two Tailed Tests

Type i and type ii errors.

All Modules

Z score Table

t score Table

The procedure for hypothesis testing is based on the ideas described above. Specifically, we set up competing hypotheses, select a random sample from the population of interest and compute summary statistics. We then determine whether the sample data supports the null or alternative hypotheses. The procedure can be broken down into the following five steps.  

• Step 1. Set up hypotheses and select the level of significance α.

H 0 : Null hypothesis (no change, no difference);  

H 1 : Research hypothesis (investigator's belief); α =0.05

• Step 2. Select the appropriate test statistic.  

The test statistic is a single number that summarizes the sample information.   An example of a test statistic is the Z statistic computed as follows:

When the sample size is small, we will use t statistics (just as we did when constructing confidence intervals for small samples). As we present each scenario, alternative test statistics are provided along with conditions for their appropriate use.

• Step 3.  Set up decision rule.  

The decision rule is a statement that tells under what circumstances to reject the null hypothesis. The decision rule is based on specific values of the test statistic (e.g., reject H 0 if Z > 1.645). The decision rule for a specific test depends on 3 factors: the research or alternative hypothesis, the test statistic and the level of significance. Each is discussed below.

• The decision rule depends on whether an upper-tailed, lower-tailed, or two-tailed test is proposed. In an upper-tailed test the decision rule has investigators reject H 0 if the test statistic is larger than the critical value. In a lower-tailed test the decision rule has investigators reject H 0 if the test statistic is smaller than the critical value.  In a two-tailed test the decision rule has investigators reject H 0 if the test statistic is extreme, either larger than an upper critical value or smaller than a lower critical value.
• The exact form of the test statistic is also important in determining the decision rule. If the test statistic follows the standard normal distribution (Z), then the decision rule will be based on the standard normal distribution. If the test statistic follows the t distribution, then the decision rule will be based on the t distribution. The appropriate critical value will be selected from the t distribution again depending on the specific alternative hypothesis and the level of significance.  
• The third factor is the level of significance. The level of significance which is selected in Step 1 (e.g., α =0.05) dictates the critical value.   For example, in an upper tailed Z test, if α =0.05 then the critical value is Z=1.645.  

The following figures illustrate the rejection regions defined by the decision rule for upper-, lower- and two-tailed Z tests with α=0.05. Notice that the rejection regions are in the upper, lower and both tails of the curves, respectively. The decision rules are written below each figure.

Rejection Region for Lower-Tailed Z Test (H 1 : μ < μ 0 ) with α =0.05

The decision rule is: Reject H 0 if Z < 1.645.

Rejection Region for Two-Tailed Z Test (H 1 : μ ≠ μ 0 ) with α =0.05

The decision rule is: Reject H 0 if Z < -1.960 or if Z > 1.960.

The complete table of critical values of Z for upper, lower and two-tailed tests can be found in the table of Z values to the right in "Other Resources."

Critical values of t for upper, lower and two-tailed tests can be found in the table of t values in "Other Resources."

• Step 4. Compute the test statistic.  

Here we compute the test statistic by substituting the observed sample data into the test statistic identified in Step 2.

• Step 5. Conclusion.  

The final conclusion is made by comparing the test statistic (which is a summary of the information observed in the sample) to the decision rule. The final conclusion will be either to reject the null hypothesis (because the sample data are very unlikely if the null hypothesis is true) or not to reject the null hypothesis (because the sample data are not very unlikely).  

If the null hypothesis is rejected, then an exact significance level is computed to describe the likelihood of observing the sample data assuming that the null hypothesis is true. The exact level of significance is called the p-value and it will be less than the chosen level of significance if we reject H 0 .

Statistical computing packages provide exact p-values as part of their standard output for hypothesis tests. In fact, when using a statistical computing package, the steps outlined about can be abbreviated. The hypotheses (step 1) should always be set up in advance of any analysis and the significance criterion should also be determined (e.g., α =0.05). Statistical computing packages will produce the test statistic (usually reporting the test statistic as t) and a p-value. The investigator can then determine statistical significance using the following: If p < α then reject H 0 .  

• Step 1. Set up hypotheses and determine level of significance

H 0 : μ = 191 H 1 : μ > 191                 α =0.05

The research hypothesis is that weights have increased, and therefore an upper tailed test is used.

• Step 2. Select the appropriate test statistic.

Because the sample size is large (n > 30) the appropriate test statistic is

• Step 3. Set up decision rule.  

In this example, we are performing an upper tailed test (H 1 : μ> 191), with a Z test statistic and selected α =0.05.   Reject H 0 if Z > 1.645.

We now substitute the sample data into the formula for the test statistic identified in Step 2.  

We reject H 0 because 2.38 > 1.645. We have statistically significant evidence at a =0.05, to show that the mean weight in men in 2006 is more than 191 pounds. Because we rejected the null hypothesis, we now approximate the p-value which is the likelihood of observing the sample data if the null hypothesis is true. An alternative definition of the p-value is the smallest level of significance where we can still reject H 0 . In this example, we observed Z=2.38 and for α=0.05, the critical value was 1.645. Because 2.38 exceeded 1.645 we rejected H 0 . In our conclusion we reported a statistically significant increase in mean weight at a 5% level of significance. Using the table of critical values for upper tailed tests, we can approximate the p-value. If we select α=0.025, the critical value is 1.96, and we still reject H 0 because 2.38 > 1.960. If we select α=0.010 the critical value is 2.326, and we still reject H 0 because 2.38 > 2.326. However, if we select α=0.005, the critical value is 2.576, and we cannot reject H 0 because 2.38 < 2.576. Therefore, the smallest α where we still reject H 0 is 0.010. This is the p-value. A statistical computing package would produce a more precise p-value which would be in between 0.005 and 0.010. Here we are approximating the p-value and would report p < 0.010.                  

In all tests of hypothesis, there are two types of errors that can be committed. The first is called a Type I error and refers to the situation where we incorrectly reject H 0 when in fact it is true. This is also called a false positive result (as we incorrectly conclude that the research hypothesis is true when in fact it is not). When we run a test of hypothesis and decide to reject H 0 (e.g., because the test statistic exceeds the critical value in an upper tailed test) then either we make a correct decision because the research hypothesis is true or we commit a Type I error. The different conclusions are summarized in the table below. Note that we will never know whether the null hypothesis is really true or false (i.e., we will never know which row of the following table reflects reality).

Table - Conclusions in Test of Hypothesis

In the first step of the hypothesis test, we select a level of significance, α, and α= P(Type I error). Because we purposely select a small value for α, we control the probability of committing a Type I error. For example, if we select α=0.05, and our test tells us to reject H 0 , then there is a 5% probability that we commit a Type I error. Most investigators are very comfortable with this and are confident when rejecting H 0 that the research hypothesis is true (as it is the more likely scenario when we reject H 0 ).

When we run a test of hypothesis and decide not to reject H 0 (e.g., because the test statistic is below the critical value in an upper tailed test) then either we make a correct decision because the null hypothesis is true or we commit a Type II error. Beta (β) represents the probability of a Type II error and is defined as follows: β=P(Type II error) = P(Do not Reject H 0 | H 0 is false). Unfortunately, we cannot choose β to be small (e.g., 0.05) to control the probability of committing a Type II error because β depends on several factors including the sample size, α, and the research hypothesis. When we do not reject H 0 , it may be very likely that we are committing a Type II error (i.e., failing to reject H 0 when in fact it is false). Therefore, when tests are run and the null hypothesis is not rejected we often make a weak concluding statement allowing for the possibility that we might be committing a Type II error. If we do not reject H 0 , we conclude that we do not have significant evidence to show that H 1 is true. We do not conclude that H 0 is true.

 The most common reason for a Type II error is a small sample size.

return to top | previous page | next page

Content ©2017. All Rights Reserved. Date last modified: November 6, 2017. Wayne W. LaMorte, MD, PhD, MPH

Critical Z-Values: Gatekeepers in Hypothesis Testing

The world of statistics is full of tools, techniques, and terminologies that help us navigate the vast seas of data and draw meaningful conclusions. Among the plethora of statistical terms, ‘critical Z-values’ stands out, especially when venturing into the domain of hypothesis testing. To comprehend the importance and application of critical Z-values, let’s dive deeper into its essence and workings.

Z-Values: A Brief Refresher

At its foundation, a Z-value, or Z-score, indicates how many standard deviations a data point is away from the mean in a given dataset. This score can be both positive and negative, denoting values above or below the mean, respectively.

Discover how to calculate the z-score

What Are Critical Z-Values?

Critical Z-values, often termed critical values, are threshold values set on a standard normal distribution curve. These values, usually one on the left (negative) and one on the right (positive), effectively create a boundary or region. When testing hypotheses, if your test statistic falls within this region, you would reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis.

The selection of these critical values is directly linked to the significance level (often denoted as α) that the researcher or analyst has chosen. Commonly used significance levels include 0.05, 0.01, and 0.10.

The Mechanics of Critical Z-Values

To understand this concept better, let’s take the commonly used significance level of 0.05. If you’re conducting a two-tailed test (which means you’re considering extreme values on both ends of the distribution), you’d split this α into two, placing 0.025 in each tail. Using a Z-table or statistical software, you’d then identify the Z-values that correspond to these tail areas. For a significance level of 0.05, the critical Z-values are typically -1.96 and +1.96.

Critical Z-Values in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a methodological process where statisticians make an initial assumption (the null hypothesis) and test the validity of this assumption based on sample data.

The process typically follows these steps:

• State the Hypotheses: Formulate the null (Ho) and alternative hypotheses (Ha).
• Choose the Significance Level (α): Decide the threshold for rejecting the null hypothesis.
• Select the Test and Find the Critical Value(s): For a Z-test, this would be the critical Z-value.
• Compute the Test Statistic: Calculate the Z-score for your sample data.
• Make a Decision: If your test statistic falls within the critical region (beyond the critical Z-values), you’d reject the null hypothesis.

Examples and Applications

Example 1: Imagine a shoe manufacturer claims their shoes last an average of 365 days before showing significant wear. A competitor believes these shoes wear out faster and conducts a study with a sample of shoes. Using a significance level of 0.05 for a two-tailed test, the critical Z-values are -1.96 and +1.96. If the Z-score calculated from the sample data is -2.1 (indicating the shoes wore out faster than claimed), the null hypothesis would be rejected since -2.1 falls outside the critical values.

Example 2: A beverage company claims its juice box contains 250 ml of juice. A consumer group, suspecting the company overstates the quantity, tests a sample. Using a one-tailed test at α = 0.05 (because they only care if the juice box contains less than claimed), the critical Z-value for this test would be -1.645. If their sample calculation results in a Z-score of -1.8, the null hypothesis would be rejected, suggesting the juice boxes contain less than the stated amount.

Why Are Critical Z-Values Important?

Critical Z-values serve as gatekeepers. They provide the boundary beyond which the observed data is considered rare or unusual under the assumption that the null hypothesis is true. By setting these boundaries, statisticians have a clear framework to determine whether to reject the null hypothesis or fail to reject it.

Find out everything you need to know about standard deviation

Critical Z-values, while just numbers on the surface, are pivotal in hypothesis testing, guiding decisions and providing clarity. They act as the yardstick against which observed data is measured, helping determine the validity of initial assumptions. In a world drowning in data, tools like critical Z-values help sieve through the noise, enabling researchers, analysts, and professionals to draw significant, actionable insights. As the backbone of hypothesis testing, understanding and applying critical Z-values is indispensable for anyone seeking to make informed decisions based on data.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

User Preferences

Content preview.

Arcu felis bibendum ut tristique et egestas quis:

• Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris
• Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
• Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident

Keyboard Shortcuts

Hypothesis testing.

Key Topics:

• Basic approach
• Null and alternative hypothesis
• Decision making and the p -value
• Z-test & Nonparametric alternative

Basic approach to hypothesis testing

• State a model describing the relationship between the explanatory variables and the outcome variable(s) in the population and the nature of the variability. State all of your assumptions .
• Specify the null and alternative hypotheses in terms of the parameters of the model.
• Invent a test statistic that will tend to be different under the null and alternative hypotheses.
• Using the assumptions of step 1, find the theoretical sampling distribution of the statistic under the null hypothesis of step 2. Ideally the form of the sampling distribution should be one of the “standard distributions”(e.g. normal, t , binomial..)
• Calculate a p -value , as the area under the sampling distribution more extreme than your statistic. Depends on the form of the alternative hypothesis.
• Choose your acceptable type 1 error rate (alpha) and apply the decision rule : reject the null hypothesis if the p-value is less than alpha, otherwise do not reject.
• \(\frac{\bar{X}-\mu_0}{\sigma / \sqrt{n}}\)
• general form is: (estimate - value we are testing)/(st.dev of the estimate)
• z-statistic follows N(0,1) distribution
• 2 × the area above |z|, area above z,or area below z, or
• compare the statistic to a critical value, |z| ≥ z α/2 , z ≥ z α , or z ≤ - z α
• Choose the acceptable level of Alpha = 0.05, we conclude …. ?

Making the Decision

It is either likely or unlikely that we would collect the evidence we did given the initial assumption. (Note: “likely” or “unlikely” is measured by calculating a probability!)

If it is likely , then we “ do not reject ” our initial assumption. There is not enough evidence to do otherwise.

If it is unlikely , then:

• either our initial assumption is correct and we experienced an unusual event or,
• our initial assumption is incorrect

In statistics, if it is unlikely, we decide to “ reject ” our initial assumption.

Example: Criminal Trial Analogy

First, state 2 hypotheses, the null hypothesis (“H 0 ”) and the alternative hypothesis (“H A ”)

• H 0 : Defendant is not guilty.
• H A : Defendant is guilty.

Usually the H 0 is a statement of “no effect”, or “no change”, or “chance only” about a population parameter.

While the H A , depending on the situation, is that there is a difference, trend, effect, or a relationship with respect to a population parameter.

• It can one-sided and two-sided.
• In two-sided we only care there is a difference, but not the direction of it. In one-sided we care about a particular direction of the relationship. We want to know if the value is strictly larger or smaller.

Then, collect evidence, such as finger prints, blood spots, hair samples, carpet fibers, shoe prints, ransom notes, handwriting samples, etc. (In statistics, the data are the evidence.)

Next, you make your initial assumption.

• Defendant is innocent until proven guilty.

In statistics, we always assume the null hypothesis is true .

Then, make a decision based on the available evidence.

• If there is sufficient evidence (“beyond a reasonable doubt”), reject the null hypothesis . (Behave as if defendant is guilty.)
• If there is not enough evidence, do not reject the null hypothesis . (Behave as if defendant is not guilty.)

If the observed outcome, e.g., a sample statistic, is surprising under the assumption that the null hypothesis is true, but more probable if the alternative is true, then this outcome is evidence against H 0 and in favor of H A .

An observed effect so large that it would rarely occur by chance is called statistically significant (i.e., not likely to happen by chance).

Using the p -value to make the decision

The p -value represents how likely we would be to observe such an extreme sample if the null hypothesis were true. The p -value is a probability computed assuming the null hypothesis is true, that the test statistic would take a value as extreme or more extreme than that actually observed. Since it's a probability, it is a number between 0 and 1. The closer the number is to 0 means the event is “unlikely.” So if p -value is “small,” (typically, less than 0.05), we can then reject the null hypothesis.

Significance level and p -value

Significance level, α, is a decisive value for p -value. In this context, significant does not mean “important”, but it means “not likely to happened just by chance”.

α is the maximum probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is true. If α = 1 we always reject the null, if α = 0 we never reject the null hypothesis. In articles, journals, etc… you may read: “The results were significant ( p <0.05).” So if p =0.03, it's significant at the level of α = 0.05 but not at the level of α = 0.01. If we reject the H 0 at the level of α = 0.05 (which corresponds to 95% CI), we are saying that if H 0 is true, the observed phenomenon would happen no more than 5% of the time (that is 1 in 20). If we choose to compare the p -value to α = 0.01, we are insisting on a stronger evidence!

So, what kind of error could we make? No matter what decision we make, there is always a chance we made an error.

Errors in Criminal Trial:

Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Type I error (False positive): The null hypothesis is rejected when it is true.

• α is the maximum probability of making a Type I error.

Type II error (False negative): The null hypothesis is not rejected when it is false.

• β is the probability of making a Type II error

There is always a chance of making one of these errors. But, a good scientific study will minimize the chance of doing so!

The power of a statistical test is its probability of rejecting the null hypothesis if the null hypothesis is false. That is, power is the ability to correctly reject H 0 and detect a significant effect. In other words, power is one minus the type II error risk.

\(\text{Power }=1-\beta = P\left(\text{reject} H_0 | H_0 \text{is false } \right)\)

Which error is worse?

Type I = you are innocent, yet accused of cheating on the test. Type II = you cheated on the test, but you are found innocent.

This depends on the context of the problem too. But in most cases scientists are trying to be “conservative”; it's worse to make a spurious discovery than to fail to make a good one. Our goal it to increase the power of the test that is to minimize the length of the CI.

We need to keep in mind:

• the effect of the sample size,
• the correctness of the underlying assumptions about the population,
• statistical vs. practical significance, etc…

(see the handout). To study the tradeoffs between the sample size, α, and Type II error we can use power and operating characteristic curves.

What type of error might we have made?

Type I error is claiming that average student height is not 65 inches, when it really is. Type II error is failing to claim that the average student height is not 65in when it is.

We rejected the null hypothesis, i.e., claimed that the height is not 65, thus making potentially a Type I error. But sometimes the p -value is too low because of the large sample size, and we may have statistical significance but not really practical significance! That's why most statisticians are much more comfortable with using CI than tests.

There is a need for a further generalization. What if we can't assume that σ is known? In this case we would use s (the sample standard deviation) to estimate σ.

If the sample is very large, we can treat σ as known by assuming that σ = s . According to the law of large numbers, this is not too bad a thing to do. But if the sample is small, the fact that we have to estimate both the standard deviation and the mean adds extra uncertainty to our inference. In practice this means that we need a larger multiplier for the standard error.

We need one-sample t -test.

One sample t -test

• Assume data are independently sampled from a normal distribution with unknown mean μ and variance σ 2 . Make an initial assumption, μ 0 .
• t-statistic: \(\frac{\bar{X}-\mu_0}{s / \sqrt{n}}\) where s is a sample st.dev.
• t-statistic follows t -distribution with df = n - 1
• Alpha = 0.05, we conclude ….

Testing for the population proportion

Let's go back to our CNN poll. Assume we have a SRS of 1,017 adults.

We are interested in testing the following hypothesis: H 0 : p = 0.50 vs. p > 0.50

What is the test statistic?

If alpha = 0.05, what do we conclude?

We will see more details in the next lesson on proportions, then distributions, and possible tests.

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Statistics and probability

Course: statistics and probability   >   unit 12, hypothesis testing and p-values.

• One-tailed and two-tailed tests
• Z-statistics vs. T-statistics
• Small sample hypothesis test
• Large sample proportion hypothesis testing

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Video transcript

Learn Math and Stats with Dr. G

A shortcut is the longest distance between two points.

Finding z Critical Values (zc)

In many cases, critical values are required.

A critical value often represents a rejection region cut-off value for a hypothesis test – also called a zc value for a confidence interval.

For confidence intervals and two-tailed z-tests, you can use the zTable to determine the critical values (zc).

Find the critical values for a 90% Confidence Interval.

NOTICE: A 90% Confidence Interval will have the same critical values (rejection regions) as a two-tailed z test with alpha = .10.

The Critical Values for a 90% confidence or alpha = .10 are +/- 1.645.

Example 2 Find the critical values for a 95% confidence interval. These are the same as the rejection region z-value cut-offs for a two-tailed z test with alpha = .05.

Note that when alpha = .05 we are using a 95% confidence interval.

Z Table. Z Score Table. Normal Distribution Table. Standard Normal Table.

What is Z-Test?

Z-Test is a statistical test which let’s us approximate the distribution of the test statistic under the null hypothesis using normal distribution .

Z-Test is a test statistic commonly used in hypothesis test when the sample data is large.For carrying out the Z-Test, population parameters such as mean, variance, and standard deviation should be known.

This test is widely used to determine whether the mean of the two samples are different when the variance is known. We make use of the Z score and the Z table for running the Z-Test.

Z-Test as Hypothesis Test

A test statistic is a random variable that we calculate from the sample data to determine whether to reject the null hypothesis. This random variable is used to calculate the P-value, which indicates how strong the evidence is against the null hypothesis. Z-Test is such a test statistic where we make use of the mean value and z score to determine the P-value. Z-Test compares the mean of two large samples taken from a population when the variance is known.

Z-Test is usually used to conduct a hypothesis test when the sample size is greater than 30. This is because of the central limit theorem where when the sample gets larger, the distributed data graph starts resembling a bell curve and is considered to be distributed normally. Since the Z-Test follows normal distribution under the null hypothesis, it is the most suitable test statistic for large sample data.

Why do we use a large sample for conducting a hypothesis test?

In a hypothesis test, we are trying to reject a null hypothesis with the evidence that we should collect from sample data which represents only a portion of the population. When the population has a large size, and the sample data is small, we will not be able to draw an accurate conclusion from the test to prove our null hypothesis is false. As sample data provide us a door to the entire population, it should be large enough for us to arrive at a significant inference. Hence a sufficiently large data should be considered for a hypothesis test especially if the population is huge.

How to Run a Z-Test

Z-Test can be considered as a test statistic for a hypothesis test to calculate the P-value. However, there are certain conditions that should be satisfied by the sample to run the Z-Test.

The conditions are as follows:

• The sample size should be greater than 30.

This is already mentioned above. The size of the sample is an important factor in Z-Testing as the Z-Test follows a normal distribution and so should the data. If the same size is less than 30, it is recommended to use a t-test instead

• All the data point should be independent and doesn’t affect each other.

Each element in the sample, when considered single should be independent and shouldn’t have a relationship with another element.

• The data must be distributed normally.

This is ensured if the sample data is large.

• The sample should be selected randomly from a population.

Each data in the population should have an equal chance to be selected as one of the sample data.

• The sizes of the selected samples should be equal if at all possible.

When considering multiple sample data, ensuring that the size of each sample is the same for an accurate calculation of population parameters.

• The standard deviation of the population is known.

The population parameter, standard deviation must be given to run a Z-Test as we cannot perform the calculation without knowing it. If it is not directly given, then it assumed that the variance of the sample data is equal to the variance of the entire population.

If the conditions are satisfied, the Z-Test can be successfully implemented.

Following are steps to run the Z-Test:

• State the null hypothesis

The null hypothesis is a statement of no effect and it supports the data which is already given. It is generally represented as :

• State the alternate hypothesis

The statement that we are trying to prove is the alternate hypothesis. It is represented as:

This is the representation of a bidirectional alternate hypothesis.

• H 1 :µ > k

This is the representation of a one-directional alternate hypothesis that is represented in the right region of the graph.

• H 1 :µ < k

This is the representation of a one-directional alternate hypothesis that is represented in the left region of the graph.

• Choose an alpha level for the test.

Alpha level or significant level is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true. It is represented by ( α ). An alpha level must be chosen wisely so as to avoid the Type I and Type II errors.

If we choose a large alpha value such as 10%, it is likely to reject a null hypothesis when it is true. There is a probability of 10% for us to reject the null hypothesis. This is an error known as the Type I error.

On the other hand, if we choose an alpha level as low as 1%, there is a chance to accept the null hypothesis even if it is false. That is we reject the alternate hypothesis to favor the null hypothesis. This is the Type II error.

Hence the alpha level should be chosen in such a way that the chance of making Type I or Type II error is minimal. For this reason, the alpha level is commonly selected as 5% which is proven best to avoid errors.

• Determining the critical value of Z from the Z table.

The critical value is the point in the normal distribution graph that splits the graph into two regions: the acceptance region and the rejection regions. It can be also described as the extreme value for which a null hypothesis can be accepted. This critical value of Z can be found from the Z table .

• Calculate the test statistic.

The sample data that we choose to test is converted into a single value. This is known as the test statistic. This value is compared to the null value. If the test statistic significantly differs from the null value, the null value is rejected.

• Comparing the test statistic with the critical value.

Now, we have to determine whether the test statistic we have calculated comes under the acceptance region or the rejection region. For this, the test statistic is compared with the critical value to know whether we should accept or reject a null hypothesis.

Types of Z-Test

Z-Test can be used to run a hypothesis test for a single sample or to compare the mean of two samples. There are two common types of Z-Test

One-Sample Z-Test

This is the most basic type of hypothesis test that is widely used. For running an one-sample Z-Test, all we need to know is the mean and standard deviation of the population. We consider only a single sample for a one-sample Z-Test. One-sample Z-Test is used to test whether the population parameter is different from the hypothesized value i.e whether the mean of the population is equal to, less than or greater than the hypothesized value.

The equation for finding the value of Z is:

The following are the assumptions that are generally taken for a one-sampled Z-Test:

• The sample size is equal to or greater than 30.
• One normally distributed sample is considered with the standard deviation known.
• The null hypothesis is that the population mean that is calculated from the sample is equal to the hypothetically determined population mean.

Two-Sample Z-Test

A two-sample Z-Test is used whenever there is a comparison between two independent samples. It is used to check whether the difference between the means is equal to zero or not. Suppose if we want to know whether men or women prefer to drive more in a city, we use a two-sample Z-Test as it is the comparison of two independent samples of men and women.

• x 1 and x 2 represent the mean of the two samples.
• µ 1 and µ 2 are the hypothesized mean values.
• σ 1 and σ 2 are the standard deviations.
• n 1 and n 2 are the sizes of the samples.

The following are the assumptions that are generally taken for a two-sample Z-Test:

• Two independent, normally distributed samples are considered for the Z-Test with the standard deviation known.
• Each sample is equal to or greater than 30.
• The null hypothesis is stated that the population mean of the two samples taken does not differ.

Critical value

A critical value is a line that splits a normally distributed graph into two different sections. Namely the ‘Rejection region’ and ‘Acceptance region’. If your test value falls in the ‘Rejection region’, then the null hypothesis is rejected and if your test value falls in the ‘Accepted region’, then the null hypothesis is accepted.

Critical Value Vs Significant Value

Significant level, alpha is the probability of rejecting a null hypothesis when it is actually true. While the critical value is the extreme value up to which a null hypothesis is true. There migh come a confusion regarding both of these parameters.

Critical value is a value that lies in critical region. It is in fact the boundary value of the rejection region. Also, it is the value up to which the null hypothesis is true. Hence the critical value is considered to be the point at which the null hypothesis is true or is rejected.

Critical value gives a point of extremity whose probability is indicated by the significant level. Significant level is pre-selected for a hypothesis test and critical value is calculated from this Alpha value. Critical value is a point represented as Z score and Significant level is a probability.

Z-Test Vs T-Test

Z-Test are used when the sample size exceeds 30. As Z-Test follows normal distribution, large sample size can be taken for the Z-Test. Z-Test indicates the distance of a data point from the mean of the data set in terms of standard deviation. Also. this test can only be used if the standard deviation of the data set is known.

T-Test is based on T distribution in which the mean value is known and the variance could be calculated from the sample. T-Test is most preferred to know the difference between the statistical parameters of two samples as the standard deviation of the samples are not usually given in a two-sample test for running the Z-Test. Also, if the sample size is less than 30, T-Test is preferred.