Quantitative Methods 2010

13

Hypothesis Testing –
Means Of Dependent (Paired) Samples

QM 2010 - Transcend 1
 Motivation
• Previous session examples had independent samples
– Hiranandani women-laborers --- different sites
– ICICI Bank training program --- different batches
– Practice problem 1 --- different car models
– Practice problem 2 --- different tax-returns
• Now we consider examples with 2 data on the same
item/person/place.
– We still have 2 samples of data, but the 2 samples have some
dependency or commonality between them.
– More precise analysis is possible.
– We can remove effect of a “confounding factor”

QM 2010 - Transcend 2
 Example – Pandey’s Gym
• Pandey’s Gym claims that average participant in its new
weight-loss program loses more than 17 lbs. Records of
10 recent participants selected at random are shown
below –
Before-After Weights Of Participants In Pandey's Gym Program

Participant No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wt before, lbs 189 202 220 207 194 177 193 202 208 233
Wt after, lbs 170 179 203 192 172 161 174 187 186 204

• At 5% significance level, can we say the claim is justified?

Note: By using same participant before and after, they have avoided confounding
effect of differing participants. QM 2010 - Transcend 3
Solution to Pandey’s Gym Problem
• H0 : µ1 - µ2 = 17 --- 1 is before, and 2 is after
H1 : µ1 - µ2 > 17
• Since we are not really interested in weights
themselves, we are only interested in weight-
loss, we treat problem as paired-samples
problem and re-state hypothesis as
• H0 : µL = 17 --- where µL is mean of weight-loss
population
H1 : µL > 17
QM 2010 - Transcend 4
 Treat Weight-loss As New Variable

Participant No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ave Std Dev

Wt before, lbs 189 202 220 207 194 177 193 202 208 233
Wt after, lbs 170 179 203 192 172 161 174 187 186 204
Loss, lbs 19 23 17 15 22 16 19 15 22 29 19.7 4.40

QM 2010 - Transcend 5
 Solution to Pandey’s Gym Problem
• Since sample size is small, and population standard deviation is
not known, we have to use t-table with 9 df.
• For 5% level of significance one-sided, we look in 10% column
two-sided
– tCRIT = +1.833
x
• Sample ave loss, = 197/10 = 19.7 lbs
• Sample std dev , s = 4.40 lbs
• Std error of mean loss = 4.40/sqrt(10) = 1.39
• tActual = (19.7 – 17)/1.39 = 1.94
• Since tActual falls in critical (rejection) region, we reject null hypo
and declare that Pandey’s Gym claim is justified.

QM 2010 - Transcend 6
Graphical Rep Of Pandey’s Gym Problem

t –Distribution With 9 df

tCrit = 1.833

tActual = 1.94

x
0

QM 2010 - Transcend 7
 If We Regard Samples As Independent
• H0 : µ1 - µ2 = 17 --- 1 is before, and 2 is after
H1 : µ1 - µ2 > 17
2
• We would have x1  202.5, s1  253.61, n1  10and
2
x 2  182.8, s2  201.96, n2  10

• We would compute estimate of pooled std dev

2 2
( n  1) s ( n  1) s
s  1
 1 2 2
n  n  2 n  n  2 = 15.09
p
1 2 1 2

• We would compute estimate of std error of

difference of means
1 1
s s 
n n = 6.79
x1  x 2 p
1 2

QM 2010 - Transcend 8
 If We Regard Samples As Independent

• We would go to t- table with (10 + 10 – 2 =) 18

df (0.10 column) and find tCrit = 1.734
• We would compute tActual –
( x1  x 2 )  ( 1   2 )
t = (19.7 – 0)/6.79 = 0.40
s x1  x 2

• Now since tActual falls in acceptance region, we

would have to accept null hypo and declare
that Pandey’s Gym claim is unjustified.
QM 2010 - Transcend 9
 Why The Two Conclusions Differ
• In paired sample test –
– The std dev of individual differences was small
– So observed average difference of 19.7 seemed
large in comparison to hypothesized 17.0, and we
had to reject null hypo.
• In independent sample test –
– The std dev of before and after were large
– So observed difference of 19.7 did not seem large
in comparison to 17.0, and we had to accept null.
QM 2010 - Transcend 10
 End Of Session
Hypo Testing –
Means Of Dependent Samples

QM 2010 - Transcend 11