8.1 Null and alternative hypotheses

Statistical hypotheses are the foundation of inferential statistics, allowing researchers to make claims about populations based on sample data. Null hypotheses assume no effect, while alternative hypotheses propose a specific difference or relationship. This framework enables systematic evaluation of research questions and quantification of uncertainty in statistical conclusions.

Formulating clear, testable hypotheses is crucial for effective statistical analysis. Researchers must consider simple vs composite hypotheses, one-tailed vs two-tailed tests, and the relationship between null and alternative hypotheses. This process guides the choice of statistical methods and shapes the interpretation of results in the context of the research question.

Concept of statistical hypotheses

• Fundamental building blocks in statistical inference allow researchers to make probabilistic statements about population parameters
• Provides a framework for systematically evaluating claims about populations based on sample data
• Crucial for drawing conclusions in theoretical statistics and applying statistical methods to real-world problems

Null hypothesis definition

Top images from around the web for Null hypothesis definition

• 

  Hypothesis Testing (5 of 5) | Concepts in Statistics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Comparing two means – Learning Statistics with R View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Hypothesis Testing (3 of 5) | Concepts in Statistics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Hypothesis Testing (5 of 5) | Concepts in Statistics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Comparing two means – Learning Statistics with R View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Null hypothesis definition

• 

  Hypothesis Testing (5 of 5) | Concepts in Statistics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Comparing two means – Learning Statistics with R View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Hypothesis Testing (3 of 5) | Concepts in Statistics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Hypothesis Testing (5 of 5) | Concepts in Statistics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Comparing two means – Learning Statistics with R View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Statement assuming no effect or no difference in the population parameter being studied
• Typically denoted as H₀, represents the status quo or default position
• Often formulated as an equality ($\mu = \mu_0$) or using phrases like "no difference" or "no relationship"
• Serves as a starting point for statistical analysis, allowing researchers to quantify evidence against it

Alternative hypothesis definition

• Contradicts the null hypothesis, proposing a specific effect or difference exists
• Usually denoted as H₁ or Hₐ, represents the research hypothesis or claim being investigated
• Can be directional (one-tailed) or non-directional (two-tailed)
• Formulated to capture the researcher's expectations or the effect of interest in the study

Importance in statistical testing

• Provides a structured approach to making inferences about population parameters
• Allows quantification of uncertainty in statistical conclusions
• Helps control for Type I and Type II errors in decision-making processes
• Facilitates communication of research findings and standardizes statistical reporting
• Forms the basis for calculating p-values and determining statistical significance

Formulating hypotheses

Characteristics of good hypotheses

• Clear and concise statements about population parameters or relationships
• Mutually exclusive and exhaustive, covering all possible outcomes
• Testable using available statistical methods and data
• Relevant to the research question and grounded in theory or prior knowledge
• Falsifiable, allowing for the possibility of rejection based on empirical evidence

Simple vs composite hypotheses

• Simple hypotheses specify a single, exact value for the population parameter
  • $H_0: \mu = 100$ (simple null hypothesis)
  • $H_1: \mu = 105$ (simple alternative hypothesis)
• Composite hypotheses involve a range of values or inequalities
  • $H_0: \mu \leq 100$ (composite null hypothesis)
  • $H_1: \mu > 100$ (composite alternative hypothesis)
• Impact the choice of statistical test and interpretation of results

One-tailed vs two-tailed hypotheses

• One-tailed (directional) hypotheses specify the direction of the effect
  • $H_1: \mu > \mu_0$ (right-tailed) or $H_1: \mu < \mu_0$ (left-tailed)
  • Increased power to detect effects in the specified direction
• Two-tailed (non-directional) hypotheses consider both directions
  • $H_1: \mu \neq \mu_0$
  • More conservative approach, suitable when the direction is uncertain
• Choice depends on research question and prior knowledge

Null hypothesis specifics

Role in statistical inference

• Serves as a baseline for comparison in hypothesis testing
• Allows for the calculation of test statistics and p-values
• Facilitates the control of Type I error rates in statistical decision-making
• Provides a framework for assessing the strength of evidence against a default position

Common forms of null hypotheses

• No difference between groups: $H_0: \mu_1 = \mu_2$
• No effect of a treatment: $H_0: \mu_{treatment} = \mu_{control}$
• No correlation between variables: $H_0: \rho = 0$
• Population parameter equals a specific value: $H_0: \theta = \theta_0$
• No change over time: $H_0: \mu_{before} = \mu_{after}$

Limitations and criticisms

• May not always represent a meaningful or realistic scenario
• Can lead to misinterpretation if not carefully formulated
• Focuses on absence of effect rather than practical significance
• Susceptible to issues with small sample sizes and low statistical power
• May oversimplify complex research questions or phenomena

Alternative hypothesis considerations

Relationship to null hypothesis

• Directly contradicts the null hypothesis, proposing a specific effect or difference
• Must be mutually exclusive with the null hypothesis
• Determines the critical region for hypothesis testing
• Influences the choice of statistical test and interpretation of results

Types of alternative hypotheses

• Point alternative: specifies an exact value ($H_1: \mu = 105$)
• Directional alternative: indicates the direction of effect ($H_1: \mu > 100$)
• Non-directional alternative: allows for effects in either direction ($H_1: \mu \neq 100$)
• Interval alternative: specifies a range of values ($H_1: 95 < \mu < 105$)
• Composite alternative: includes multiple possible values or ranges

Power and effect size

• Statistical power increases with larger effect sizes
• Effect size quantifies the magnitude of the difference or relationship
• Common effect size measures include Cohen's d, Pearson's r, and odds ratios
• Power analysis helps determine sample size needed to detect a specific effect
• Consideration of practical significance alongside statistical significance

Hypothesis testing framework

Steps in hypothesis testing

• Formulate null and alternative hypotheses
• Choose an appropriate significance level (α)
• Select a suitable statistical test based on data and hypotheses
• Collect and analyze data to calculate test statistic and p-value
• Compare p-value to significance level or use critical values
• Make a decision to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis
• Interpret results in context of the research question

Type I and Type II errors

• Type I error (false positive): rejecting a true null hypothesis
  • Probability = α (significance level)
  • Controlled by setting a lower significance level
• Type II error (false negative): failing to reject a false null hypothesis
  • Probability = β
  • Related to statistical power (1 - β)
• Trade-off between Type I and Type II errors in hypothesis testing
• Importance of considering both error types in research design

Significance level and p-value

• Significance level (α): predetermined threshold for rejecting the null hypothesis
  • Common values include 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001
  • Represents the maximum acceptable probability of Type I error
• p-value: probability of obtaining results as extreme as observed, assuming null hypothesis is true
  • Smaller p-values indicate stronger evidence against the null hypothesis
  • Compared to significance level to make decisions in hypothesis testing
• Relationship between p-value, significance level, and statistical significance

Decision making process

Rejecting vs failing to reject

• Reject null hypothesis when p-value < significance level
  • Concludes there is sufficient evidence to support the alternative hypothesis
  • Does not prove the alternative hypothesis is true
• Fail to reject null hypothesis when p-value ≥ significance level
  • Insufficient evidence to conclude against the null hypothesis
  • Does not prove the null hypothesis is true
• Importance of careful language in reporting results

Interpreting test results

• Consider context of the research question and study design
• Evaluate practical significance alongside statistical significance
• Assess effect sizes and confidence intervals for meaningful interpretation
• Consider potential sources of bias or confounding factors
• Acknowledge limitations and uncertainties in the analysis

Practical vs statistical significance

• Statistical significance indicates the unlikelihood of results occurring by chance
• Practical significance considers the real-world importance of the observed effect
• Large sample sizes can lead to statistically significant but practically insignificant results
• Importance of considering effect sizes and confidence intervals
• Balancing statistical rigor with practical implications in decision-making

Advanced concepts

Multiple hypothesis testing

• Increased risk of Type I errors when conducting multiple tests
• Family-wise error rate: probability of making at least one Type I error in a set of tests
• Methods for controlling family-wise error rate
  • Bonferroni correction: adjusts significance level by dividing by number of tests
  • False Discovery Rate (FDR) control: focuses on proportion of false positives
• Importance in fields with high-dimensional data (genomics, neuroimaging)

Bayesian vs frequentist approaches

• Frequentist approach: based on long-run frequency of events, uses p-values and confidence intervals
• Bayesian approach: incorporates prior beliefs, updates probabilities based on observed data
• Differences in interpretation of probability and uncertainty
• Bayesian methods allow for direct probability statements about hypotheses
• Trade-offs between interpretability, computational complexity, and prior specification

Confidence intervals and hypotheses

• Confidence intervals provide a range of plausible values for population parameters
• Relationship between confidence intervals and hypothesis tests
  • 95% CI not including null value ≈ rejecting null hypothesis at α = 0.05
• Advantages of reporting confidence intervals alongside p-values
  • Provide information about precision and effect size
  • Allow for assessment of practical significance
• Interpretation of overlapping and non-overlapping confidence intervals

Applications in research

Experimental design considerations

• Importance of a priori hypothesis formulation
• Sample size determination through power analysis
• Randomization and control group selection to minimize bias
• Blinding procedures to reduce experimenter and participant bias
• Consideration of potential confounding variables and interactions

Reporting hypothesis test results

• Clear statement of null and alternative hypotheses
• Description of statistical test used and assumptions checked
• Reporting of test statistic, degrees of freedom, and p-value
• Inclusion of effect sizes and confidence intervals
• Interpretation of results in context of research question and limitations

Replication and reproducibility issues

• Importance of pre-registration and detailed methods reporting
• Publication bias and its impact on the scientific literature
• Challenges in replicating studies with small effect sizes or low power
• Role of meta-analyses in synthesizing evidence across multiple studies
• Open science practices to improve transparency and reproducibility