Traditional Hypothesis Testing Using Z
Traditional Hypothesis Testing Using Z
0.10 ± 1.65
Two-Tailed
Test
0.05 ± 1.96 Critical
H 0 : μ=k Critical
Region Noncritical Region Region
H1: μ ≠ k
0.01 ± 2.58
0.10 +1.28
Right-Tailed
Test
H 0 : μ=k 0.05 +1.65 Critical
Region
H 1 : μ>k Noncritical Region
0.01 +2.33
−¿ 1.2
0.10
Left-Tailed 8
Test −¿ 1.6
H 0 : μ=k 0.05 Critical
5 Region
H 1 : μ<k Noncritical Region
−¿ 2.3
0.01
3
The second method is by looking at Table E for the value closest to 0.005 which is
−2.58 . Take in inverse of this value (+2.58) and assign it as the CV.
The z test is a statistical test for the mean of a population. It can be used when n >
30, or when the population is normally distributed and s is known. The formula for the z
test is
X −μ
z=
σ / √n
Where:
x = sample mean
μ = hypothesized population mean
σ = population standard deviation
n = sample size
Steps in Hypothesis Testing
Example 1:
A researcher wishes to see if the mean number of days that a basic, low-price, small
automobile sits on a dealer’s lot is 29. A sample of 30 automobile dealers has a mean of
30.1 days for basic, low-price, small automobiles. At α =¿ 0.05, test the claim that the mean
time is greater than 29 days. The standard deviation of the population is 3.8 days.
Solution:
Step 1:
H 0: The mean number of days a basic, low-price, small automobile sits on a dealer’s
lot is 29 days ¿).
H 1: The mean number of days a basic, low-price, small automobile sits on a dealer’s
lot greater than 29 days (μ>29). This is the claim.
Step 2:
α =0.05
The test is right-tailed
The CV closest to 0.05 in Table E is −¿1.65. Take the inverse and assign as the CV.
+1.65
Decision:
If z > 1.69, reject the null hypothesis.
Step 3:
Given: μ=29
X =30.1
σ =3.8
n=30
X−μ 30.1−29
z=¿ = ¿ 1.59
σ /√ n 3.8/ √ 30
Step 4:
Step 5:
The null hypothesis is failed to be rejected, hence there is not enough evidence to
support the claim that the mean number of days a basic, low-price, small automobile
sits on a dealer’s lot greater than 29 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example 2:
A researcher claims that the average cost of men’s athletic shoes is less than $80. He selects
a random sample of 36 pairs of shoes from a catalog and finds the following costs (in
dollars). (The costs have been rounded to the nearest dollar.) Is there enough evidence to
support the researcher’s claim at α =¿ 0.10? Assume σ =¿ 19.2.
60 70 75 55 80 55
50 40 80 70 50 95
120 90 75 85 80 60
110 65 80 85 85 45
75 60 90 90 60 95
110 85 45 90 70 70
Solution:
Step 1:
Step 2:
α =0.10
Test is left-tailed
The CV closest to 0.05 in Table E is −¿1.28
−¿ 1.2
Decision:
If z ←1.28 , reject the null hypothesis.
Step 3:
Since the problem presents a raw data, it is necessary to find the mean. Add all the
data value and divide it by n (36).
2700
X =¿ ¿ 75
36
μ=80
σ =19.2
n=36
X−μ 75−80
z=¿ = ¿−1.56
σ / √ n 19.2/ √3 6
Step 4:
There is enough evidence to support the claim that the average cost of men’s athletic
shoes is less than $80
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Example 3:
The Medical Rehabilitation Education Foundation reports that the average cost of
rehabilitation for stroke victims is $24,672. To see if the average cost of rehabilitation is
different at a particular hospital, a researcher selects a random sample of 35 stroke victims
at the hospital and finds that the average cost of their rehabilitation is $26,343. The
standard deviation of the population is $3251. At α =¿ 0.01, can it be concluded that the
average cost of stroke rehabilitation at a particular hospital is different from $24,672?
Solution:
Step 1:
H 1: The average cost of rehabilitation for stroke victims is not equal $24,672
( μ ≠ $ 24,672). This is the claim
Step 2:
α =0.01
Test is two-tailed.
α 0.01
Find the CV closest to = = 0.005. The CV is ± 2.58
2 2
Critical Critical
Region Noncritical Region Region
−¿ 2.5 +¿ 2.5
Decision:
If −2.58> z >+2.58 , then reject the null hypothesis. (The inequality tells us the
z must not be less than −2.58 or greater than 2.58 .)
Step 3:
μ=24,672
X =26,343
σ =3251
n=35
X−μ 26,343−24,672
z=¿ = ¿ 3.04
σ /√ n 3,251/ √ 35
Step 4:
Step 5:
There is enough evidence to support the claim that of rehabilitation for stroke
victims is not equal $24,672. Looking into the value o z, it can also be concluded the
average cost of rehabilitation is greater than the population mean.
You can use this diagram if you are having a hard time interpreting your findings: