Question about two sample t-test (unpaired)

  • Thread starter Thread starter chever
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    T-test
chever
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I have read that the statistic computed for the unpaired two sample t-test is:

t = \frac{\bar{x} - \bar{y}}{\sqrt{SEM_x + SEM_y}}

where:

SEM_x = \frac{\sigma^2_x}{n_x}

(and likewise for y).

Part of this makes sense: it is satisfactorily proven to me that that Var(\bar{x} - \bar{y}) = Var(\bar{x}) + Var(\bar{y}) when the two variables are independent. Then the denominator is the standard deviation of the term \bar{x} - \bar{y}). What doesn't make sense is that the numerator isn't normalized. In the one sample t-test, one computes:

t = \frac{\bar{x} - \mu_x}{\sqrt{SEM_x}}

so, here, \bar{x} is normalized with \mu_x. I don't see why this shouldn't also apply to the two-sample case. Can someone enlighten me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the two-sample t-test, you're testing whether the two samples are different from each other; that is, whether the mean of the difference between them is zero. You can think of the numerator as having an implicit 0 subtracted from it, if you like.
 
pmsrw3 said:
In the two-sample t-test, you're testing whether the two samples are different from each other; that is, whether the mean of the difference between them is zero. You can think of the numerator as having an implicit 0 subtracted from it, if you like.

That clarifies matters a bit. Thank you.
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Back
Top