Chapter 6

Hypothesis Testing
Standard Deviation

2
 Regression

Dependent variable

Independent variable (x)

Regression is the attempt to explain the variation in a dependent

variable using the variation in independent variables.
Regression is thus an explanation of causation.
If the independent variable(s) sufficiently explain the variation in the
dependent variable, the model can be used for prediction.
 Simple Linear Regression

Dependent variable (y)

y’ = b0 + b1X ± є
є

B1 = slope
= ∆y/ ∆x
b0 (y intercept)

Independent variable (x)

The output of a regression is a function that predicts the dependent

variable based upon values of the independent variables.

Simple regression fits a straight line to the data.

 Simple Linear Regression

Observation: y

Dependent variable Prediction: y^

Zero
Independent variable (x)

The function will make a prediction for each observed data point.
^
The observation is denoted by y and the prediction is denoted by y.
 Simple Linear Regression

Prediction error: ε

Observation: y
Prediction: y^

Zero

For each observation, the variation can be described as:

y=^
y+ε
Actual = Explained + Error
 Regression

Dependent variable

Independent variable (x)

A least squares regression selects the line with the lowest total sum
of squared prediction errors.
This value is called the Sum of Squares of Error, or SSE.
 Calculating SSR

Dependent variable Population mean: y

Independent variable (x)

The Sum of Squares Regression (SSR) is the sum of the squared

differences between the prediction for each observation and the
population mean.
 Regression Formulas

The Total Sum of Squares (SST) is equal to SSR + SSE.

Mathematically,

SSR = ∑ ( ^y – y ) 2 (measure of explained variation)

^)
SSE = ∑ ( y – y (measure of unexplained variation)

2
SST = SSR + SSE = ∑ ( y – y ) (measure of total variation in y)
 What is Hypothesis Testing?
• … the use of statistical procedures to answer research
questions
• Typical research question (generic):

• For hypothesis testing, research questions are statements:

• This is the null hypothesis (assumption of “no difference”)

• Statistical procedures seek to reject or accept the null
hypothesis (details to follow)
10
 Statistical Procedures
• Two types:
– Parametric
• Data are assumed to come from a distribution, such as the
normal distribution, t-distribution, etc.
– Non-parametric
• Data are not assumed to come from a distribution
– Lots of debate on assumptions testing and what to do if
assumptions are not met (avoided here, for the most
part)
– A reasonable basis for deciding on the most appropriate
test is to match the type of test with the measurement
scale of the data (next slide)
11
Measurement Scales vs. Statistical Tests

• Parametric tests most appropriate for…

– Ratio data, interval data
• Non-parametric tests most appropriate for…
– Ordinal data, nominal data (although limited use for ratio and
interval data)
12
 Tests Presented Here
• Parametric
– Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
• Used for ratio data and interval data
• Most common statistical procedure in HCI research
• Non-parametric
– Chi-square test
• Used for nominal data
– Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon Signed-Rank, Kruskal-
Wallis, and Friedman tests
• Used for ordinal data

13
 Analysis of Variance
• The analysis of variance (ANOVA) is the most
widely used statistical test for hypothesis testing in
factorial experiments
• Goal  determine if an independent variable has a
significant effect on a dependent variable
• Remember, an independent variable has at least
two levels (test conditions)
• Goal (put another way)  determine if the test
conditions yield different outcomes on the
dependent variable (e.g., one of the test conditions
is faster/slower than the other)
14
 Why Analyse the Variance?
• Seems odd that we analyse the variance, but the
research question is concerned with the overall
means:

• Let’s explain through two simple examples (next

slide)

15
 Example #1 Example #2

“Significant” implies that in all “Not significant” implies that the

likelihood the difference observed difference observed is likely due
is due to the test conditions to chance.
(Method A vs. Method B).

File: 06-AnovaDemo.xlsx 16
Example #1 - Details
Note: Within-subjects design

Error bars show

±1 standard deviation

Note: SD is the square root of the variance

17
 Example #1 – ANOVA1

Probability of obtaining the observed

data if the null hypothesis is true

Thresholds for “p”

Reported as… • .05
• .01
• .005
F1,9 = 9.80, p < .05 • .001
• .0005
• .0001

1 ANOVA table created by StatView (now marketed as JMP, a product of SAS; www.sas.com)
 How to Report an F-statistic

• Notice in the parentheses

– Uppercase for F
– Lowercase for p
– Italics for F and p
– Space both sides of equal sign
– Space after comma
– Space on both sides of less-than sign
– Degrees of freedom are subscript, plain, smaller font
– Three significant figures for F statistic
– No zero before the decimal point in the p statistic (except in Europe)
Example #2 - Details

Error bars show

±1 standard deviation
Example #2 – ANOVA

Probability of obtaining the observed

data if the null hypothesis is true

Note: For non-significant

Reported as… effects, use “ns” if F < 1.0,
or “p > .05” if F > 1.0.

F1,9 = 0.626, ns
Example #2 - Reporting

22
More Than Two Test Conditions

23
 ANOVA

• There was a significant effect of Test Condition on the

dependent variable (F3,45 = 4.95, p < .005)
• Degrees of freedom
– If n is the number of test conditions and m is the number of
participants, the degrees of freedom are…
– Effect  (n – 1)
– Residual  (n – 1)(m – 1)
– Note: single-factor, within-subjects design

24
 Post Hoc Comparisons Tests
• A significant F-test means that at least one of the test
conditions differed significantly from one other test
condition
• Does not indicate which test conditions differed
significantly from one another
• To determine which pairs differ significantly, a post hoc
comparisons tests is used
• Examples:
– Fisher PLSD, Bonferroni/Dunn, Dunnett, Tukey/Kramer,
Games/Howell, Student-Newman-Keuls, orthogonal contrasts,
Scheffé
• Scheffé test on next slide

25
 Scheffé Post Hoc Comparisons

• Test conditions A:C and B:C differ significantly

(see chart three slides back)

26
 Between-subjects Designs
• Research question:
– Do left-handed users and
right-handed users differ in
the time to complete an
interaction task?
• The independent variable
(handedness) must be
assigned between-subjects
• Example data set 

27
Summary Data and Chart

28
 ANOVA

• The difference was not statistically significant (F1,14 =

3.78, p > .05)
• Degrees of freedom:
– Effect  (n – 1)
– Residual  (m – n)
– Note: single-factor, between-subjects design

29
 Two-way ANOVA
• An experiment with two independent variables is a two-
way design
• ANOVA tests for
– Two main effects + one interaction effect
• Example
– Independent variables
• Device  D1, D2, D3 (e.g., mouse, stylus, touchpad)
• Task  T1, T2 (e.g., point-select, drag-select)
– Dependent variable
• Task completion time (or something, this isn’t important here)
– Both IVs assigned within-subjects
– Participants: 12
– Data set (next slide)
30
Data Set

31
Summary Data and Chart

32
 ANOVA

Can you pull the relevant statistics from

this chart and craft statements indicating
the outcome of the ANOVA?

33
ANOVA - Reporting

34
 Anova2 Software
• HCI:ERP web site includes analysis of variance Java
software: Anova2
• Operates from command line on data in a text file
• Extensive API with demos, data files, discussions, etc.
• Download and demonstrate

Demo

35
 Dix et al. Example1

• Single-factor, within-
subjects design
• See API for discussion

1Dix, A., Finlay, J., Abowd, G., & Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction (3rd ed.). London:
36
Prentice Hall. (p. 337)
 Dix et al. Example

• With counterbalancing
• Treating “Group” as a
between-subjects factor1
• Includes header lines

37
1 See API and HCI:ERP for discussion on “counterbalancing and testing for a group effect”.
 Chi-square Test (Nominal Data)
• A chi-square test is used to investigate relationships
• Relationships between categorical, or nominal-scale,
variables representing attributes of people, interaction
techniques, systems, etc.
• Data organized in a contingency table – cross tabulation
containing counts (frequency data) for number of
observations in each category
• A chi-square test compares the observed values against
expected values
• Expected values assume “no difference”
• Research question:
– Do males and females differ in their method of scrolling on
desktop systems? (next slide)
38
Chi-square – Example #1
MW = mouse wheel
CD = clicking, dragging
KB = keyboard

39
Chi-square – Example #1

Significant if it
exceeds critical value
(next slide)

2 = 1.462
(See HCI:ERP for calculations)
40
 Chi-square Critical Values
• Decide in advance on alpha (typically .05)
• Degrees of freedom
– df = (r – 1)(c – 1) = (2 – 1)(3 – 1) = 2
– r = number of rows, c = number of columns

2 = 1.462 (< 5.99 not significant)

41
 ChiSquare Software
• Download ChiSquare software from HCI:ERP
• Note: calculates p (assuming  = .05)

Demo

42
 Chi-square – Example #2
• Research question:
– Do students, professors, and parents differ in their
responses to the question: Students should be allowed
to use mobile phones during classroom lectures?
• Data:

43
 Chi-square – Example #2
• Result: significant difference in responses (2 = 20.5, p < .0001)
• Post hoc comparisons reveal that opinions differ between
students:parents and professors:parents (students:professors do not
differ significantly in their responses)

1 = students, 2 = professors, 3 = parents 44

 Non-parametric Tests for Ordinal Data

• Non-parametric tests used most commonly on

ordinal data (ranks)
• See HCI:ERP for discussion on limitations
• Type of test depends on
– Number of conditions  2 | 3+
– Design  between-subjects | within-subjects

45
 Non-parametric – Example #1
• Research question:
– Is there a difference in the political leaning of Mac
users and PC users?
• Method:
– 10 Mac users and 10 PC users randomly selected and
interviewed
– Participants assessed on a 10-point linear scale for
political leaning
• 1 = very left
• 10 = very right
• Data (next slide)
46
 Data (Example #1)
• Means:
– 3.7 (Mac users)
– 4.5 (PC users)
• Data suggest PC users more right-
leaning, but is the difference
statistically significant?
• Data are ordinal (at least),  a
non-parametric test is used
• Which test? (see below)

3.7 4.5

47
 Mann Whitney U Test1

Test statistic: U

Normalized z (calculated from U)

p (probability of the observed data,

given the null hypothesis)
Corrected for ties
Conclusion:
The null hypothesis remains
tenable: No difference in the
political leaning of Mac users and
PC users (U = 31.0, p > .05)

See HCI:ERP for complete details and discussion

1 Output table created by StatView (now marketed as JMP, a product of SAS; www.sas.com) 48
 MannWhitneyU Software
• Download MannWhitneyU Java software from
HCI:ERP web site1

Demo

49
1 MannWhitneyU files contained in NonParametric.zip.
 Non-parametric – Example #2
• Research question:
– Do two new designs for media players differ in “cool
appeal” for young users?
• Method:
– 10 young tech-savvy participants recruited and given
demos of the two media players (MPA, MPB)
– Participants asked to rate the media players for “cool
appeal” on a 10-point linear scale
• 1 = not cool at all
• 10 = really cool
• Data (next slide)
50
 Data (Example #2)
• Means
– 6.4 (MPA)
– 3.7 (MPB)
• Data suggest MPA has more “cool
appeal”, but is the difference
statistically significant?
• Data are ordinal (at least),  a
non-parametric test is used
• Which test? (see below)
6.4 3.7

51
Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test

Test statistic: Normalized z score

p (probability of the observed data,

given the null hypothesis)

Conclusion:
The null hypothesis is rejected:
Media player A has more “cool
appeal” than media player B
(z = -2.254, p < .05).

See HCI:ERP for complete details and discussion

52
 WilcoxonSignedRank Software
• Download WilcoxonSignedRank Java
software from HCI:ERP web site1

Demo

53
1 WilcoxonSignedRank files contained in NonParametric.zip.
 Non-parametric – Example #3
• Research question:
– Is age a factor in the acceptance of a new GPS device for
automobiles?
• Method
– 8 participants recruited from each of three age categories:
20-29, 30-39, 40-49
– Participants demo’d the new GPS device and then asked
if they would consider purchasing it for personal use
– They respond on a 10-point linear scale
• 1 = definitely no
• 10 = definitely yes
• Data (next slide)
54
 Data (Example #3)
• Means
– 7.1 (20-29)
– 4.0 (30-39)
– 2.9 (40-49)
• Data suggest differences by age,
but are differences statistically
significant?
• Data are ordinal (at least),  a non-
parametric is used
7.1 4.0 2.9
• Which test? (see below)

55
 Kruskal-Wallis Test

Test statistic: H (follows chi-square

distribution)

p (probability of the observed data,

given the null hypothesis)

Conclusion:
The null hypothesis is rejected:
There is an age difference in the
acceptance of the new GPS device.
(2 = 9.605, p < .01).

See HCI:ERP for complete details and discussion 56

 KruskalWallis Software
• Download KruskalWallis Java software
from HCI:ERP web site1

Demo

57
1 KruskalWallis files contained in NonParametric.zip.
 Post Hoc Comparisons
• As with the analysis of variance, a significant result only
indicates that at least one condition differs significantly
from one other condition
• To determine which pairs of conditions differ significantly,
a post hoc comparisons test is used
• Available using –ph option (see below)

58
 Non-parametric – Example #4
• Research question:
– Do four variations of a search engine interface (A, B,
C, D) differ in “quality of results”?
• Method
– 8 participants recruited and demo’d the four interfaces
– Participants do a series of search tasks on the four
search interfaces (Note: counterbalancing is used, but
this isn’t important here)
– Quality of results for each search interface assessed on
a linear scale from 1 to 100
• 1 = very poor quality of results
• 100 = very good quality of results
• Data (next slide) 59
 Data (Example #4)
• Means
– 71.0 (A), 68.1 (B), 60.9 (C),
69.8 (D)
• Data suggest a difference in
quality of results, but are the
differences statistically
significant?
• Data are ordinal (at least), 
a non-parametric test is used
• Which test? (see below) 71.0 68.1 60.9 69.8

60
 Friedman Test

Test statistic: H (follows chi-square

distribution)

p (probability of the observed data,

given the null hypothesis)

Conclusion:
The null hypothesis is rejected:
There is a difference in the quality
of results provided by the search
interfaces (2 = 8.692, p < .05).

See HCI:ERP for complete details and discussion 61

 Friedman Software
• Download Friedman Java software from
HCI:ERP web site1

Demo

62
1 Friedman files contained in NonParametric.zip.
 Post Hoc Comparisons
• As with KruskalWallis application, available
using the –ph option…

63
 Points of Discussion
• Reporting the mean vs. median for scaled
responses
• Non-parametric tests for multi-factor experiments
• Non-parametric tests for ratio-scale data

See HCI:ERP for complete details and discussion

64
Thank You

65