(Between)
Check Your Understanding: The F Distribution and the F-Ratio
Linear regression and correlation.
Professionals often want to know how two or more numeric variables are related. For example, is there a relationship between the grade on the second math exam a student takes and the grade on the final exam? If there is a relationship, what is the relationship and how strong is it?
This example may or may not be tied to a model, meaning that some theory suggested that a relationship exists. This link between a cause and an effect is the foundation of the scientific method and is the core of how we determine what we believe about how the world works. Beginning with a theory and developing a model of the theoretical relationship should result in a prediction, what we have called a hypothesis earlier. Now the hypothesis concerns a full set of relationships.
In this section we will begin with correlation, the investigation of relationships among variables that may or may not be founded on a cause-and-effect model. The variables simply move in the same, or opposite, direction. That is to say, they do not move randomly. Correlation provides a measure of the degree to which this is true. From there we develop a tool to measure cause and effect relationships, regression analysis. We will be able to formulate models and tests to determine if they are statistically sound. If they are found to be so, then we can use them to make predictions: if as a matter of policy, we changed the value of this variable what would happen to this other variable? If we imposed a gasoline tax of 50 cents per gallon how would that effect the carbon emissions, sales of Hummers/Hybrids, use of mass transit, etc.? The ability to provide answers to these types of questions is the value of regression as both a tool to help us understand our world and to make thoughtful policy decisions.
As we begin this section, we note that the type of data we will be working with has changed. Perhaps unnoticed, all the data we have been using is for a single variable. It may be from two samples, but it is still a univariate variable. The type of data described for any model of cause and effect is bivariate data — “bi” for two variables. In reality, statisticians use multivariate data, meaning many variables.
Data can be classified into three broad categories: time series data, cross-section data, and panel data. Time series data measures a single unit of observation; say a person, or a company or a country, as time passes. What are measures will be at least two characteristics, say the person’s income, the quantity of a particular good they buy and the price they paid. This would be three pieces of information in one time period, say 1985. If we followed that person across time we would have those same pieces of information for 1985, 1986, 1987, etc. This would constitute a time series data set.
A second type of data set is for cross-section data. Here the variation is not across time for a single unit of observation, but across units of observation during one point in time. For a particular period of time, we would gather the price paid, amount purchased, and income of many individual people.
A third type of data set is panel data. Here a panel of units of observation is followed across time. If we take our example from above, we might follow 500 people, the unit of observation, through time, ten years, and observe their income, price paid and quantity of the good purchased. If we had 500 people and data for ten years for price, income and quantity purchased we would have 15,000 pieces of information. These types of data sets are very expensive to construct and maintain. They do, however, provide a tremendous amount of information that can be used to answer very important questions. As an example, what is the effect on the labor force participation rate of women as their family of origin, mother and father, age? Or are there differential effects on health outcomes depending upon the age at which a person started smoking? Only panel data can give answers to these and related questions because we must follow multiple people across time.
Beginning with a set of data with two independent variables we ask the question: are these related? One way to visually answer this question is to create a scatter plot of the data. We could not do that before when we were doing descriptive statistics because those data were univariate. Now we have bivariate data so we can plot in two dimensions. Three dimensions are possible on a flat piece of paper but become very hard to fully conceptualize. Of course, more than three dimensions cannot be graphed although the relationships can be measured mathematically.
To provide mathematical precision to the measurement of what we see we use the correlation coefficient. The correlation tells us something about the co-movement of two variables, but nothing about why this movement occurred. Formally, correlation analysis assumes that both variables being analyzed are independent variables. This means that neither one causes the movement in the other. Further, it means that neither variable is dependent on the other, or for that matter, on any other variable. Even with these limitations, correlation analysis can yield some interesting results.
In practice all correlation and regression analysis will be provided through computer software designed for these purposes. Anything more than perhaps one-half a dozen observations creates immense computational problems. It was because of this fact that correlation, and even more so, regression, were not widely used research tools until after the advent of “computing machines.” Now the computing power required to analyze data using regression packages is deemed almost trivial by comparison to just a decade ago.
Remember, all the correlation coefficient tells us is whether or not the data are linearly related. In panel (d) the variables obviously have some type of very specific relationship to each other, but the correlation coefficient is zero, indicating no linear relationship exists.
What the VALUE of r tells us:
What the SIGN of r tells us
Check Your Understanding: The Correlation Coefficient r
Linear regression to two variables is based on a linear equation with one independent variable. The equation has the form:
Where a and b are constant numbers.
The variable x is the independent variable, and y is the dependent variable . Another way to think about this equation is a statement of cause and effect. The X variable is the cause, and the Y variable is the hypothesized effect. Typically, you choose a value to substitute for the independent variable and then solve for the dependent variable.
Slope and Y-Intercept of a Linear Equation
Regression analysis is a statistical technique that can test the hypothesis that a variable is dependent upon one or more other variables. Further, regression analysis can provide an estimate of the magnitude of the impact of a change in one variable on another. This last feature, of course, is all important in predicting future values.
Regression analysis is based upon a functional relationship among variables and further, assumes that the relationship is linear. This linearity assumption is required because, for the most part, the theoretical statistical properties of non-linear estimation are not well worked out yet by the mathematicians and econometricians. This presents us with some difficulties in economic analysis because many of our theoretical models are nonlinear. The marginal cost curve, for example, is decidedly nonlinear as is the total cost function, if we are to believe in the effect of specialization of labor and the Law of Diminishing Marginal Product. There are techniques for overcoming some of these difficulties, exponential and logarithmic transformation of the data for example, but at the outset we must recognize that standard ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis will always use a linear function to estimate what might be a nonlinear relationship.
The general linear regression model can be stated by the equation:
As with our earlier work with probability distributions, this model works only if certain assumptions hold. These are that the Y is normally distributed, the errors are also normally distributed with a mean of zero and a constant standard deviation, and that the error terms are independent of the size of X and independent of each other.
Assumptions of the Ordinary Least Squares Regression Model
Each of these assumptions needs a bit more explanation. If one of these assumptions fails to be true, then it will have an effect on the quality of the estimates. Some of the failures of these assumptions can be fixed while others result in estimates that quite simply provide no insight into the questions the model is trying to answer or worse, give biased estimates.
This is the general form that is most often called the multiple regression model. So-called “simple” regression analysis has only one independent (right-hand) variable rather than many independent variables. Simple regression is just a special case of multiple regression. There is some value in beginning with simple regression: it is easy to graph in two dimensions, difficult to graph in three dimensions, and impossible to graph in more than three dimensions. Consequently, our graphs will be for the simple regression case. Figure 22 presents the regression problem in the form of a scatter plot graph of the data set where it is hypothesized that Y is dependent upon the single independent variable X.
The regression problem comes down to determining which straight line would best represent the data in Figure 23. Regression analysis is sometimes called “least squares” analysis because the method of determining which line best “fits” the data is to minimize the sum of the squared residuals of a line put through the data.
Consider the graph in Figure 24. The notation has returned to that for the more general model rather than the specific case of the Macroeconomic consumption function in our example.
If the observed data point lies above the line, the residual is positive, and the line underestimates the actual data value for y.
If the observed data point lies below the line, the residual is negative, and the line overestimates that actual data value for y.
The sum of the errors squared is the term obviously called Sum of Squared Errors (SSE).
The slope b can also be written as:
The variance of the errors is fundamental in testing hypotheses for a regression. It tells us just how “tight” the dispersion is about the line. As we will see shortly, the greater the dispersion about the line, meaning the larger the variance of the errors, the less probable that the hypothesized independent variable will be found to have a significant effect on the dependent variable. In short, the theory being tested will more likely fail if the variance of the error term is high. Upon reflection this should not be a surprise. As we tested hypotheses about a mean we observed that large variances reduced the calculated test statistic and thus it failed to reach the tail of the distribution. In those cases, the null hypotheses could not be rejected. If we cannot reject the null hypothesis in a regression problem, we must conclude that the hypothesized independent variable has no effect on the dependent variable.
A way to visualize this concept is to draw two scatter plots of x and y data along a predetermined line. The first will have little variance of the errors, meaning that all the data points will move close to the line. Now do the same except the data points will have a large estimate of the error variance, meaning that the data points are scattered widely along the line. Clearly the confidence about a relationship between x and y is affected by this difference between the estimate of the error variance.
Check Your Understanding: Linear Equations
Check Your Understanding: Residual Plots
Check Your Understanding: Calculating the Equation of a Regression Line
Check Your Understanding: Interpreting Slope of Regression Line and Interpreting y-intercept in Regression Model
Check Your Understanding: Using Least Squares Regression Output
The multiple correlation coefficient, also called the coefficient of multiple determination or the coefficient of determination , is given by the formula:
Descriptive statistics, using microsoft excel’s “descriptive statistics” tool.
How to use microsoft excel for regression analysis.
Please read this text on how to use Microsoft Excel for regression analysis.
This section explains the relevance of the regression models for trip generation, mode choice, traffic flow-speed-density relationship, traffic safety, and appropriate sample size for spot speed study to transportation engineering coursework.
The trip generation step is the first of the four-step process for estimating travel demand for infrastructure planning. It involves estimating the number of trips made to and from each traffic analysis zone (TAZ). Trip generation models are estimated based on land use and trip-making data. They use either linear regression or cross-tabulation of household characteristics. Simple linear regression is described in the section above titled “ Compute and Interpret Simple Linear Regression Between Two Variables” , and the tools to conduct the linear regression are discussed in “ Data Analysis Tools (Spreadsheets and Basic Programming)”.
Estimation of Mode Choice is also part of the four-step process for estimating travel demand. It entails estimating the trip makers’ transportation mode (drive alone, walk, take public transit, etc.) choices. The results of this step are the counts of trips categorized by mode. The most popular mode choice model is the discrete choice, multinomial logit model. Hypothesis tests are conducted for the estimated model parameters to assess whether they are “statistically significant.” The section titled “ Use Specific Significance Tests Including, Z-Test, T-Test (one and two samples), Chi-Squared Test” of this chapter provides extensive information on hypothesis testing.
Greenshield’s model is used to represent the traffic flow-speed-density relationship. Traffic speed and traffic density (number of vehicles per unit mile) are collected to estimate a linear regression model for speed as a function of density. “ Compute and Interpret Simple Linear Regression Between Two Variables” above provides information on simple linear regression. “ Data Analysis Tools (Spreadsheets and Basic Programming)” provides guidance for implementing the linear regression technique using tools available in Microsoft Excel and the programing language R.
Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
Q&A for work
Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.
I am curious about a claim made in Wikipedia's article on effect size . Specifically:
[...] a non-null statistical comparison will always show a statistically significant results unless the population effect size is exactly zero
I am not sure what this means/implies, let alone an argument to back it up. I guess, after all, an effect is a statistic, i.e., a value calculated from a sample , with its own distribution. Does this mean that effects are never due to just random variation (which is what I understand it means to not be significant)? Do we then just consider whether the effect is strong enough -- having high absolute value?
I am considering the effect I am most familiar with: the Pearson correlation coefficient r seems to contradict this. Why would any $r$ be statistically-significant? If $r$ is small our regression line $$ y=ax+b = r\left(\frac {s_y}{s_x}\right) = \epsilon x+b $$
For $\epsilon$ small,is close to 0, an F-test will likely contain a confidence interval containing 0 for the slope. Isn't this a counterexample?
As @Kodiologist points out, this is really about what happens for large sample sizes. For small sample sizes there's no reason why you can't have false positives or false negatives.
I think the $z$-test makes the asymptotic case clearest. Suppose we have $X_1, \dots, X_n \stackrel{\text{iid}}\sim \mathcal N(\mu, 1)$ and we want to test $H_0: \mu = 0$ vs $H_A: \mu \neq 0$. Our test statistic is $$ Z_n = \frac{\bar X_n - 0}{1 / \sqrt n} = \sqrt n\bar X_n. $$
$\bar X_n \sim \mathcal N(\mu, \frac 1n)$ so $Z_n = \sqrt n \bar X_n \sim \mathcal N(\mu \sqrt n, 1)$. We are interested in $P(|Z_n| \geq \alpha)$. $$ P(|Z_n| \geq \alpha) = P(Z_n \leq -\alpha)+ P(Z_n \geq \alpha) $$ $$ = 1 + \Phi(-\alpha - \mu\sqrt n) - \Phi(\alpha - \mu \sqrt n). $$ Let $Y \sim \mathcal N(0,1)$ be our reference variable. Under $H_0$ $\mu = 0$ so we have $P(|Z_n| \geq \alpha) = 1 - P(-\alpha \leq Y \leq \alpha)$ so we can choose $\alpha$ to control our type I error rate as desired. But under $H_A$ $\mu \sqrt n \neq 0$ so $$ P(|Z_n| \geq \alpha) \to 1 + \Phi(\pm\infty) - \Phi(\pm\infty) = 1 $$ so with probability 1 we will reject $H_0$ if $\mu \neq 0$ (the $\pm$ is in case of $\mu < 0$, but either way the infinities have the same sign).
The point of this is that if $\mu$ exactly equals $0$ then our test statistic has the reference distribution and we'll reject 5% (or whatever we choose) of the time. But if $\mu$ is not exactly $0$, then the probability that we'll reject heads to $1$ as $n$ increases. The idea here is the consistency of a test, which is that under $H_A$ the power (probability of rejecting) heads to $1$ as $n \to \infty$.
It's the exact same story with the test statistic for testing $H_0 : \rho = \rho_0$ versus $H_A: \rho \neq \rho_0$ with the Pearson correlation coefficient. If the null hypothesis is false, then our test statistic gets larger and larger in probability, so the probability that we'll reject approaches $1$.
As a simple example, suppose that I am estimating your height using some statistical mumbo jumbo.
You've always stated to others that you are 177 cm (about 5 ft 10 in).
If I were to test this hypothesis (that your height is equal to 177 cm, $h = 177$), and I could reduce the error in my measurement enough, then I could prove that you are not in fact 177 cm. Eventually, if I estimate your height to enough decimal places, you would almost surely deviate from the stated height of 177.00000000 cm. Perhaps you are 177.02 cm; I only have to reduce my error to less than .02 to find out that you are not 177 cm.
How do I reduce the error in statistics? Get a bigger sample. If you get a large enough sample, the error gets so small that you can detect the most minuscule deviations from the null hypothesis.
Arguably what they said is wrong, if for no other reason than their use of "this always happens".
I don't know if this is the crux of the confusion you're having, but I'll post it because I think many do and will get confused by this:
Rather, it means $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty} \pr (x) = 1$..
What they are literally saying translates to the following:
For any sample size $n$ above some minimum size $n_0$, the result of any non-null test is guaranteed to be significant if the true effect size is not exactly zero.
What they were trying to say, though, is the following:
For any significance level, as the sample size is increased, the probability that a non-null test yields a significant result approaches 1 if the true effect size is not exactly zero.
There are crucial differences here:
There is no guarantee. You are only more likely to get a significant result with a bigger sample. Now, they could dodge part of the blame here, because so far it's just a terminology issue. In a probabilistic context, it is understood that the statement "if n is large enough then X" can also be interpreted to mean "X becomes more and more likely to be true as n grows large" . However, this interpretation goes out my window as soon as they say this "always" happens. The proper terminology here would have been to say this happens " with high probability " 1 .
This is secondary, but their wording is confusing—it seems to imply that you fix the sample size to be "large enough", and then the statement holds true for any significance level. However, regardless of what the precise mathematical statement is, that doesn't really make sense: you always first fix the significance level, and then you choose the sample size to be large enough. But the suggestion that it can somehow be the other way around unfortunately emphasizes the $n > n_0$ interpretation of "large enough", so that makes the above problem even worse.
But once you understand the literature, you get what they're trying to say.
(Side note: incidentally, this is exactly one of the constant problems many people have with Wikipedia. Frequently, it's only possible to understand what they're saying if you already know the material, so it's only good for a reference or as a reminder, not as self-teaching material.)
1 For the fellow pedants (hi!), yes, the term has a more specific meaning than the one I linked to. The loosest technical term we probably want here is "asymptotically almost surely" . See here .
My favorite example is number of fingers by gender. The vast majority of people have 10 fingers. Some have lost fingers due to accidents. Some have extra fingers.
I don't know if men have more fingers than women (on average). All the easily available evidence suggests that men and women both have 10 fingers.
However, I am highly confident that if I did a census of all men and all women then I would learn that one gender has more fingers (on average) than the other.
Sign up or log in, post as a guest.
Required, but never shown
By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy .
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
In hypothesis testing studies, this is mathematically calculated, conventionally, as the sample size necessary to be 80% certain of identifying a statistically significant outcome should the hypothesis be true for the population, with P for statistical significance set at 0.05.
The first aim is to explain the importance of sample size and its relationship to effect size (ES) and statistical significance. The second aim is to assist researchers planning to perform sample size estimations by suggesting and elucidating available alternative software, guidelines and references that will serve different scientific purposes.
Sample size refers to the total number of individuals involved in an experiment or study. Sample size is important because it directly affects how precisely we can estimate population parameters. To understand why this is the case, it helps to have a basic understanding of confidence intervals.
To summarize why sample size is important: The two major factors affecting the power of a study are the sample size and the effect size. A study should only be undertaken once there is a realistic chance that the study will yield useful information. A study that has a sample size which is too small may produce inconclusive results and could ...
Hypothesis testing takes all of this information and uses it to calculate the p-value —which you use to determine statistical significance. The key takeaway is that the statistical significance of any effect depends collectively on the size of the effect, the sample size, and the variability present in the sample data.
Hypothesis testing is a crucial procedure to perform when you want to make inferences about a population using a random sample. These inferences include estimating population properties such as the mean, differences between means, proportions, and the relationships between variables. This post provides an overview of statistical hypothesis testing.
This tutorial explains why sample size is important in statistics, including an explanation and several examples.
Equally important, readers of medical journals should understand sample size because such understanding is essential to interpret the relevance of a finding with regard to their own patients.
25.3 - Calculating Sample Size Before we learn how to calculate the sample size that is necessary to achieve a hypothesis test with a certain power, it might behoove us to understand the effect that sample size has on power. Let's investigate by returning to our IQ example.
Summary Hypothesis testing determines if there is sufficient evidence to support a claim (the statistical hypothesis) about a population parameter based on a sample of data. Right-sizing experiments involve trade-offs involving the probabilities of different kinds of false claims, precision of estimates, and operational and ethical constraints on sample size. Power is the probability of ...
A greater power requires a larger sample size. Effect size - This is the estimated difference between the groups that we observe in our sample. To detect a difference with a specified power, a smaller effect size will require a larger sample size. When conducting research about your customers, patients or products it's usually impossible, or ...
Understanding the intuition behind Hypothesis Testing. What exactly it is, why do we do it and how do Data Scientists perform it. Let's…
Sample size determination or estimation is the act of choosing the number of observations or replicates to include in a statistical sample. The sample size is an important feature of any empirical study in which the goal is to make inferences about a population from a sample. In practice, the sample size used in a study is usually determined ...
6.6 - Confidence Intervals & Hypothesis Testing. Confidence intervals and hypothesis tests are similar in that they are both inferential methods that rely on an approximated sampling distribution. Confidence intervals use data from a sample to estimate a population parameter. Hypothesis tests use data from a sample to test a specified hypothesis.
Here we present formulas to determine the sample size required to ensure that a test has high power. The sample size computations depend on the level of significance, aα, the desired power of the test (equivalent to 1-β), the variability of the outcome, and the effect size. The effect size is the difference in the parameter of interest that represents a clinically meaningful difference ...
1) How to derive the formula for the minimum sample size 𝜨? The essential idea behind the formula is to reverse the p-value calculation in hypothesis testing, with a particular focus on statistical power, which is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is indeed false.
Placidia. 14.5k 6 42 73. 1. In a two sample situation, increasing the sample size of one group to infinity does not send the power of the test to 1. The power will be limited by the sample size of the smaller group (or, to be precise, a combination of the variances within the groups and the sample sizes, if you think about a t t -test).
An appropriate sample renders the research more efficient: Data generated are reliable, resource investment is as limited as possible, while conforming to ethical principles. The use of sample size calculation directly influences research findings. Very small samples undermine the internal and external validity of a study.
The power of a hypothesis test is the probability of obtaining a statistically significant result when there is a true difference in treatments. For example, suppose, as Koegelenberg et al 1 did, that the smoking abstinence rate were 45% for varenicline alone and 14% larger, or 59%, for the combination regimen.
In other cases they might need other things. A caveat: If some of the assumptions don't hold, you might in some situations get an increase in false positives as sample size increases, but that's a failure of the assumptions, rather than a problem with large-sample hypothesis testing itself.
Chapter 9: Data Analysis - Hypothesis Testing, Estimating Sample Size, and Modeling This chapter provides the foundational concepts and tools for analyzing data commonly seen in the transportation profession. The concepts include hypothesis testing, assessing the adequacy of the sample sizes, and estimating the least square model fit for the data. These applications are useful in collecting ...
Hint: the clause before the portion you quoted is essential. "Given a sufficiently large sample size, a non-null statistical comparison will always show a statistically significant results unless the population effect size is exactly zero…" - Kodiologist Jan 19, 2018 at 2:29