Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A possible null hypothesis is that the mean male score is the same as the mean female score: H 0: μ 1 = μ 2. where H 0 = the null hypothesis, μ 1 = the mean of population 1, and μ 2 = the mean of population 2. A stronger null hypothesis is that the two samples have equal variances and shapes of their respective distributions.
The consistent application by statisticians of Neyman and Pearson's convention of representing "the hypothesis to be tested" (or "the hypothesis to be nullified") with the expression H 0 has led to circumstances where many understand the term "the null hypothesis" as meaning "the nil hypothesis" – a statement that the results in question have ...
Not rejecting the null hypothesis does not mean the null hypothesis is "accepted" per se (though Neyman and Pearson used that word in their original writings; see the Interpretation section). The processes described here are perfectly adequate for computation. They seriously neglect the design of experiments considerations. [32] [33]
In null-hypothesis significance testing, the p-value [note 1] is the probability of obtaining test results at least as extreme as the result actually observed, under the assumption that the null hypothesis is correct. [2] [3] A very small p-value means that such an extreme observed outcome would be very unlikely under the null hypothesis.
This method is used for null hypothesis testing and if the estimated value exists in the critical areas, the alternative hypothesis is accepted over the null hypothesis. A one-tailed test is appropriate if the estimated value may depart from the reference value in only one direction, left or right, but not both.
In statistics, the Wald test (named after Abraham Wald) assesses constraints on statistical parameters based on the weighted distance between the unrestricted estimate and its hypothesized value under the null hypothesis, where the weight is the precision of the estimate.
In 1970, L. A. Marascuilo and J. R. Levin proposed a "fourth kind of error" – a "type IV error" – which they defined in a Mosteller-like manner as being the mistake of "the incorrect interpretation of a correctly rejected hypothesis"; which, they suggested, was the equivalent of "a physician's correct diagnosis of an ailment followed by the ...
The Shapiro–Wilk test tests the null hypothesis that a sample x 1, ..., x n came from a normally distributed population. The test statistic is = (= ()) = (¯), where with parentheses enclosing the subscript index i is the ith order statistic, i.e., the ith-smallest number in the sample (not to be confused with ).