Hypotheses testing, p-values, Type I and Type II Errors
βStatistics are not substitute for judgment.β
Henry Clay (US Senator)
Hypotheses testing, p-values, Type I and Type II Errors Statistics - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Hypotheses testing, p-values, Type I and Type II Errors Statistics are not substitute for judgment. Henry Clay (US Senator) Formal hypotheses testing population A Is this a difference due B to random chance? Mean height A B sample
Henry Clay (US Senator)
sample population
Is this a difference due to random chance? Mean height Population sample
T-value
(standard error)
P-value
(percentiles, probabilities)
(t-π€πππ£π β ππΉπ¦) + π¦ Original units ππ’(π½, ππ) (π€πππ£π β π¦ )/ππΉπ¦ pπ’(tβπ€πππ£π, ππ)
1 2 3
0.001 0.999 0.50
ο‘-level Test p-value
Significant
Test p-value
Not Significant
Mean height Population sample
Theory: We can never really prove if the 2 samples are truly different or the same β only ask if what we observe (or a greater difference) is due to random chance
The lower the probability a difference is due to random chance β the more likely is the result of an effect (what we test for)
Null hypothesis is true Alternative hypothesis is true Fail to reject the null hypothesis ο Correct Decision
Incorrect Decision False Negative Type II Error Reject the null hypothesis ο Incorrect Decision False Positive Type I Error
Correct Decision
it is actually true
(H0) when it is not true
Remember rejection or acceptance of a p-value (and therefore the chance you will make an error) depends on the arbitrary ο‘-level you choose
The ο‘-level you choose is completely up to you (typically it is set at 0.05), however, it should be chosen with consideration of the consequences of making a Type I or a Type II Error. Based on your study, would you rather err on the side of false positives or false negatives?
Birch Mountain Wildlands
HO: Range of the current climate for the BMW protected area
= Range of the BMW protected area under climate change
Ha: Range of the current climate for the BMW protected area
β Range of the BMW protected area under climate change
If we reject HO: Climates ranges are different, therefore
genetic resources are not adequately protected and new protected areas need to be created
Consequences if I make:
adequately protected in the BMW protected area β we created new parks when we didnβt need to
didnβt create new protected areas and we should have From an ecological standpoint it is better to make a Type I Error, but from an economic standpoint it is better to make a Type II Error Which standpoint should I take?
Given you are testing whether or not what you observed or greater is due to random chance, more data gives you a better understanding of what is truly happening within the population, therefore sample size will the probability of making a Type 2 Error