Expressed in normal language on the level of concepts/constructs
Good hypothesis: "The recent observed rising trend in global temperatures on Earth is primarily driven by human-produced greenhouse gas emissions."
Bad hypothesis: "Homœopathic products can cure people, but sometimes they make them worse before they make them better, and the effect is only apparent subjectively with respect to some vague 'holistic' notions rather than a specific well-defined and testable set of criteria."
Let's say we're interested in factors predicting sport climbing performance
Research question: Are there morphological characteristics that predispose some people to be better at climbing?
We have a hunch that having relatively long arms might be beneficial
Conceptual hypothesis: Climbers have relatively longer arms than non-climbers
To be able to formulate a hypothesis in statistical terms, we first need to get from the conceptual level to the level of measurement
Operationalisation is the process of defining variables in terms of how they are measured
The concept of intelligence can be operationalised as total score on Raven's Progressive Matrices
The concept of cognitive inhibition can be operationalised as (some measure of) performance on the Stroop test.
The ape index (AI) compares a person's arm span to their height
Positive AI means, that your arm span is larger then your height
165 cm (5′5″) tall person with arm span of 167 cm has an ape index of +2
Found to correlate with performance in some sports (e.g., climbing, swimming, basketball)
Translation of operational hypothesis to the language of maths
Deals with specific values (or ranges of values) of population parameters
Mean of a given population can be hypothesised do be of a given value
We can hypothesise a difference in means between two populations
Negation of the statistical hypothesis
Very often about no difference/effect (but not necessarily)
Statistical (alternative) hypothesis: H1:μAI_climb≠μAI_gen
Null hypothesis: H0:μAI_climb=μAI_gen
H1 and H0 represent alternative realities (like parallel universes!)
One where there is a difference of effect
One where there isn't one
Negation of the statistical hypothesis
Very often about no difference/effect (but not necessarily)
Statistical (alternative) hypothesis: H1:μAI_climb≠μAI_gen
Null hypothesis: H0:μAI_climb=μAI_gen
H1 and H0 represent alternative realities (like parallel universes!)
One where there is a difference of effect
One where there isn't one
NHST is about deciding which one of the two realities we live in
Mathematical expressions of what we're measuring (difference, effect, relationship...)
There are many available test statistics, useful for different scenarios
For now, let's just take simple difference in means: D=¯¯¯¯¯¯AIclimb−¯¯¯¯¯¯AIgen
If null hypothesis is true, we'd expect D=0, i.e., no difference between climbers' and non-climbers' AI
H0 represents the world where there is no difference in average ape index between elite climbers and the general population
Even if true difference in population (Δ; delta) is zero, D can be non-zero in sample (here N = 30)
For simplicity, assume AIgen is normally distributed in population with μ=0 and σ=1
H0 represents the world where there is no difference in average ape index between elite climbers and the general population
Even if true difference in population (Δ; delta) is zero, D can be non-zero in sample (here N = 30)
For simplicity, assume AIgen is normally distributed in population with μ=0 and σ=1
H1 represents the world where there is a difference in average ape index between elite climbers and the general population
If H1 is true, test statistics is not centred around zero
Sometimes, a null result can still be observed (false negative; Type II error)
H1 represents the world where there is a difference in average ape index between elite climbers and the general population
If H1 is true, test statistics is not centred around zero
Sometimes, a null result can still be observed (false negative; Type II error)
The p-value is the probability of getting a test statistic at least as extreme as the one observed if the null hypothesis is really true
Tells us how likely our data are if there is no difference/effect in population
Does not tell us the probability of H0 or H1 being true
Does not tell us the probability of our data happening "by chance alone"
This is an arbitrary choice!
Commonly used significance levels are
If p-value is less than our chosen significance level, we call the result statistically significant (sufficiently unlikely under H0)
Significance level must be chosen before results are analysed!
We found a mean difference in AI between climbers and non-climbers of 0.47
This statistic has an associated p-value = .093
Under the most common significance level in psychology (.05), this is not a statistically significant difference
We thus retain the null hypothesis and report not having found a difference: our hypothesis was not supported by the data
The difference we observed is not big enough for us to dismiss the assumption that we live in the world of H0
Hypotheses should be clearly formulated, testable, and operationalised
Statistical hypotheses are statements about values of some parameters
Null hypothesis (usually, parameter is equal to 0) is the one we test (in NHST framework)
We can only observe samples, but we are interested in populations
Due to sampling error, we can find a relationship in sample even if one doesn't exist in population
NHST is one way of deciding if sample result holds in population: understanding it is crucial!
The p-value is the probability of getting a test statistic at least as extreme as the one observed if the null hypothesis is really true
Keyboard shortcuts
↑, ←, Pg Up, k | Go to previous slide |
↓, →, Pg Dn, Space, j | Go to next slide |
Home | Go to first slide |
End | Go to last slide |
Number + Return | Go to specific slide |
b / m / f | Toggle blackout / mirrored / fullscreen mode |
c | Clone slideshow |
p | Toggle presenter mode |
t | Restart the presentation timer |
?, h | Toggle this help |
Esc | Back to slideshow |