Confidence Intervals: t-distribution or normal distribution?

AI Thread Summary
When calculating confidence intervals, the choice between using t-distributions and standard normal (z) distributions depends on the sample size and whether the population standard deviation (σ) is known. Generally, the t-distribution is preferred for sample sizes with degrees of freedom less than 30, especially if σ is unknown. If the assumption of normality holds and σ is known, the z-interval can be used even for small samples. However, caution is advised with small sample sizes, particularly if the data is skewed, as this can affect the reliability of confidence intervals. Ultimately, the decision should consider both sample size and the known parameters of the data.
Richard_R
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

When working out confidence intervals based on population samples are you supposed to always use t-distributions, standard normal (z) distributions, or do you make a choice based on the sample size?

Up until now I've been lucky enough to have large sample sizes (for some work I'm doing) so have been using the z-distribution. However I now have some data sets which range from n=1 (lol) to n=29 so am not sure if I should now be using t-distributions to define confidence intervals, or how I'd make that decision (e.g. use t-distribution if n<30, for example?)

Thanks
-Rob
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Richard_R said:
Hi all,

When working out confidence intervals based on population samples are you supposed to always use t-distributions, standard normal (z) distributions, or do you make a choice based on the sample size?
Thanks
-Rob

Assuming the normal assumption is valid, the general rule is to use the t-distribution to calculate confidence intervals where the number of degrees of freedom (df=n-1) is less then 30, The Z and t scores are similar around this value. Skewed data, particularly in small samples, make CIs fairly useless. In larger samples, normalizing transformations can be useful for constructing CIs..
 
Actually the notion of using the sample size as the determining factor is being (as it should be) tossed out. It is a remnant of the days before computing power was so readily available.

IF the assumption of normality can be made, when you know \sigma (population standard deviation) use the Z-interval. When you don't know sigma (so you have only the sample standard deviation) use the t-interval.

If your data is badly skewed, it is debatable whether the mean is the appropriate parameter to measure central tendency.
 
statdad said:
Actually the notion of using the sample size as the determining factor is being (as it should be) tossed out. It is a remnant of the days before computing power was so readily available.

IF the assumption of normality can be made, when you know \sigma (population standard deviation) use the Z-interval. When you don't know sigma (so you have only the sample standard deviation) use the t-interval.

If your data is badly skewed, it is debatable whether the mean is the appropriate parameter to measure central tendency.

Well I am retired and involved in other things, but I have researched the t distribution recently and I've not run across this. However, my research was mostly on the math and not the application.

What you say makes sense. Would you use the Z value for very small samples, say n=5, if you did know sigma?

EDIT: In most of my experience sigma is not known.
 
Last edited:
If the sample size is only 5 i would be hesitant to do any confidence interval but, if pushed, if sigma were known, and if told that the data were known to be normally distributed, the Z-interval would be appropriate.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top